OGSB 2023

Three correctional officers grieved the employer's refusal to indemnify their legal costs incurred in defending criminal charges of aggravated assault arising from a use of force incident against an inmate.

The criminal charges were withdrawn.

The employer argued the officers were not entitled to indemnification because they engaged in 'code of silence' behaviour following the incident, demonstrating bad faith.

The Grievance Settlement Board allowed the grievance, finding that under Article COR 14.1.2 of the collective agreement, the requirement of good faith applies only to the acts that led to the criminal charges.

Since the employer's own investigation concluded the force used was justified and reasonable, the good faith condition was met.

The parties sought procedural directions regarding the hearing of two grievances filed by the union on behalf of the grievor.

The arbitrator directed that the two grievances be heard together but not consolidated.

Directions were given that the employer would call its case first, the parties would exchange documents and explore an agreed statement of facts, and the evidence would be limited to events between July 12, 2021, and March 14, 2022.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a procedural order setting deadlines for the exchange of full production, including medical documentation, between the Union and the Employer in advance of the hearing.

The grievor was terminated for cause following a workplace altercation over a tray of desserts, which the employer alleged violated her Last Chance Agreement (LCA).

The union grieved the termination, arguing the incident was minor and the penalty excessive.

The arbitrator found that the grievor engaged in misconduct by arguing loudly with a co-worker and ignoring a supervisor's directive to stop, violating the employer's Standards of Conduct.

Because the LCA explicitly stipulated termination as the specific penalty for any policy violation, the arbitrator held she had no jurisdiction under the Labour Relations Act to substitute a lesser penalty.

The grievance was dismissed.

The Union sought production of an Investigation Report and related materials.

On consent of the parties, the Arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the documents subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, distribution, and a requirement to destroy the documents at the conclusion of the proceedings.

The grievor, a correctional officer, was suspended and ultimately terminated for refusing to comply with the employer's COVID-19 Safe Workplace Directive, which required unvaccinated employees to undergo rapid antigen testing.

The grievor also claimed Short Term Sickness Plan benefits for a period during which he was absent due to his refusal to test, which the employer denied.

The arbitrator found that the grievor's refusal to test constituted insubordination and did not fall within the safety or privacy exceptions to the 'obey now, grieve later' rule.

The arbitrator also found that the grievor's claim for sick leave benefits was fraudulent.

The grievances challenging the suspension, the denial of sick leave benefits, and the termination were all dismissed.

The grievor failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing and advised the union of her absence the night before.

The employer requested that the grievor be ordered to provide reasons for her non-attendance.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to provide reasons for her absence by a specified date, failing which the grievance would be deemed dismissed.

The hearing was adjourned sine die.

The Union sought production of an Investigation Report and related materials.

On consent of the parties, the arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the documents subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, distribution, and use solely for the purposes of the arbitration.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order directing the Employer to produce an Investigation Report and related non-privileged materials to the Union.

The production was made subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, sharing, and retention of the documents.

The parties were also directed to prepare a joint chart of incidents underlying the grievor's termination and to schedule further hearing dates for mediation or case management.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order directing the Employer to produce an Investigation Report, appendices, and non-privileged materials to the Union.

The production was subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, forwarding, and use of the documents solely for the purpose of the arbitration.

Following unsuccessful mediation, the parties agreed on timelines for production pursuant to a prior Board order.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order setting out the deadlines for the employer's production, the union's requests for further production, dispute resolution, and the filing of a chart of incidents.

The Union sought production of an Investigation Report and related materials in a grievance arbitration.

On consent of the parties, the Arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the requested documents to the Union.

The production was made subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, distribution, and use of the documents solely for the purpose of the arbitration.

The union sought to consolidate a ninth grievance with eight previously consolidated grievances alleging a pattern of workplace harassment, bullying, discrimination, and denial of union representation by the employer.

The employer opposed the consolidation, arguing the ninth grievance involved different managers, a different timeframe, and a distinct issue regarding the use of Compensating Time Off (CTO).

The arbitrator granted the union's request, finding that the ninth grievance shared sufficient factual and legal overlap with the other grievances, as all alleged a broader pattern of employer misconduct.

The arbitrator concluded that consolidating the grievances would avoid the inefficiency of a third parallel proceeding.

The parties consented to an order directing the Employer to produce an Investigation Report and related materials to the Union.

The arbitrator ordered the production subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, electronic distribution, and use of the documents solely for the purpose of the arbitration.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued an amendment on consent to a previous decision dated May 18, 2023.

The amendment ordered the employer to produce an investigation report and related non-privileged materials to the union, subject to strict confidentiality conditions.

The conditions restrict the copying, distribution, and retention of the documents, requiring their destruction at the conclusion of the arbitration.

In a grievance arbitration concerning a 10-day suspension and a dismissal, the employer sought to bring a preliminary motion arguing that the union's allegations of reprisal under the Occupational Health and Safety Act and discrimination under the Human Rights Code were outside the scope of the grievance.

The union brought a motion arguing the scope issue should not be bifurcated from the hearing on the merits.

The arbitrator declined to bifurcate the proceedings, finding that the evidence relevant to the scope issue was intertwined with the evidence on the merits, and that fairness and practicalities weighed against dealing with the scope issue as a preliminary matter.

The Grievor, a store manager, sought sick leave claiming anxiety due to working during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Employer denied the request, arguing the Grievor intended to use accumulated sick leave to bridge to his retirement.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding the medical evidence insufficient to establish that the Grievor was unable to perform his duties.

The Board also found the Grievor's testimony lacked credibility and preferred the Employer's evidence that the Grievor had explicitly stated his intention to use sick leave until retirement.

The parties requested a case conference to address procedural matters regarding multiple grievances, including disciplinary actions leading to dismissal and an alleged failure to accommodate a disability.

The Arbitrator issued orders directing the Employer to provide particulars regarding the disciplinary issues and the Union to provide particulars, including medical information, regarding the accommodation claim.

The Arbitrator also directed individuals not to contact him directly.

The union filed 14 grievances on behalf of a flexible part-time registrar regarding hours of work, sick leave, discipline, return to work, and health and safety issues.

The arbitrator dismissed the majority of the grievances, finding that the employer properly applied the collective agreement regarding the scheduling of hours and payment for days attending the Grievance Settlement Board.

The arbitrator upheld a letter of discipline for insubordination but restored 1.5 hours of pay for a medical appointment.

The arbitrator also allowed the return-to-work grievances in part, directing the employer to pay two weeks' pay for failing to accommodate the grievor in a timely manner.

The employer brought a motion to dismiss the dispute after the complainant failed to attend a scheduled hearing and failed to comply with a subsequent Board order requiring an explanation for her non-attendance.

The complainant alleged a conflict of interest with her union representation but provided no particulars.

The union requested an adjournment sine die, suggesting underlying issues might be affecting her ability to participate.

The arbitrator granted the employer's motion and dismissed the dispute, finding that disagreement with the choice of union representative is not a reasonable explanation for non-attendance and noting the absence of any medical or other evidence to explain her non-compliance.