OGSB 2023

The Union sought an order for the production of documents from the Employer regarding a grievance.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce documents relevant to the creation of the Senior Strategic Advisor position, the decision to terminate the complainant, and any other arguably relevant documents by June 26, 2023.

The union filed a grievance alleging a violation of the management rights clause and seeking an independent evaluation of amalgamated job duties with the expectation of a higher classification.

The employer brought a motion to dismiss the grievance on the basis that it was a classification grievance for which no remedy is permitted under section 51 of the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act.

The arbitrator agreed, finding that the grievance was a classification grievance and that the Board had no jurisdiction to provide a remedy.

The employer's motion was granted and the grievance was dismissed.

The union filed a grievance alleging that the grievor was improperly denied placement on the wage grid at the time of hiring and improperly denied benefits under the Short Term Sickness Plan.

The matter proceeded through the expedited mediation-arbitration process.

The arbitrator found no breach of the collective agreement and dismissed the grievance without reasons, in accordance with the negotiated protocol.

The parties consented to an order directing the Employer to produce an Investigation Report, appendices, and non-privileged materials to the Union.

The arbitrator ordered the production subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including restrictions on copying, forwarding, and sharing the documents, and requirements to delete electronic copies at the conclusion of the hearing.

In a grievance arbitration concerning whether the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation is a paid holiday under various collective agreements, the employer sought to introduce evidence regarding its consultations with Indigenous partners and its reasons for treating the day as one of learning and reflection rather than a paid holiday.

The unions objected to the admission of this evidence.

The arbitrator ruled the evidence inadmissible, finding that it was irrelevant to the mutual intention of the parties at the time the collective agreements were negotiated and would cause unnecessary delay and prejudice.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued case management directions for two consolidated grievances concerning an eight-day suspension and placement on unauthorized leave without pay for alleged failure to comply with the Ontario Public Service COVID-19 Safe Workplace Directive.

The arbitrator set a schedule for document production, witness notices, and the filing of a joint book of documents, and limited the hearing to one day with specific time allocations for each party.

The grievor, a regular classified Correctional Officer, was granted an unpaid leave of absence to accept a full-time Constable position with the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP).

After deciding to return to his Correctional Officer position, the Employer required him to resign from the OPP and rehired him as a fixed-term employee, citing a break in service.

The union grieved, arguing he should return to his regular classified position.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the grievor had no standing to file the grievance while represented by the OPP Association.

Furthermore, the Board held that the initial leave of absence was granted in error, as Ontario Regulation 381/07 and the Compensation Directive prohibit an Ontario Public Service employee from holding two full-time positions simultaneously.

The employer requested an extension of time to file submissions directed in a previous decision due to a medical issue.

The union consented to the request.

The arbitrator granted the extension, allowing the employer until May 10, 2023, to file their submissions.

The union filed a grievance claiming the grievor was entitled to overtime pay for attending training sessions on his normal days off.

The grievor had agreed to take part in the training sessions in exchange for taking different days off.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under Article COR 5.3 of the collective agreement, premium pay is not applicable to a mutually agreed shift change.

The grievor failed to attend the scheduled grievance arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to provide a sufficient written explanation for her non-attendance by a specified date.

The employer reserved the right to seek dismissal of the grievance depending on whether an explanation is provided and its sufficiency.

The union was also ordered to provide full particulars of the grievance prior to any subsequent hearing dates.

The Union indicated that the grievor was prepared to comply with a 2016 production order and requested further hearing dates.

The arbitrator determined it was appropriate to recuse herself from any further proceedings in the file.

The parties made submissions regarding the process for a timely and efficient hearing of seven grievances filed by the grievor.

The Arbitrator issued a procedural order setting out a schedule for the exchange of written requests for particulars, production of documents, and notification of preliminary objections.

The union filed grievances on behalf of eight employees who were denied enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) before retiring from the Ontario Public Service.

The arbitrator reviewed the principles established in earlier cases regarding the employer's discretion under Appendix 46 of the collective agreement.

The arbitrator concluded that the employer properly exercised its discretion when considering the grievors' requests to exit under the TEI.

The grievances were dismissed.

The union grieved the employer's decision to deny the grievor's request for a compassionate leave of absence with pay for the final 9 days of her absence from work to care for her injured husband.

The employer had granted paid leave for the first 16 days of her absence but denied the remainder, expecting the grievor to access other resources or use vacation/banked time.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the collective agreement conferred no absolute right to paid compassionate leave and that the employer's exercise of discretion was reasonable, made in good faith, and based on relevant considerations.

The Employer (WSIB) requested an order for production of documents and particulars from the Union in a grievance arbitration.

The Arbitrator granted the request, ordering the Union to provide the requested documents, including employment records, mitigation documents, and particulars regarding the alleged collective agreement breaches and differential treatment, by April 14, 2023.

The union filed a grievance alleging an inequitable distribution of hours among Fixed Term Cooks at the North Bay Jail.

The matter proceeded through the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process.

The arbitrator found no breach of the collective agreement and dismissed the grievance without reasons, in accordance with the negotiated protocol.

The union sought a broad production order in a grievance arbitration involving allegations that the employer failed to abide by a 2013 Memorandum of Settlement.

The employer objected to producing documents pre-dating the settlement but agreed to produce post-settlement documents it could locate.

The arbitrator denied the request for pre-settlement documents, finding them too old and related to issues already fully and finally resolved by the settlement.

The arbitrator also denied the request for post-settlement documents, as the employer had already produced all located documents and could not be compelled to produce documents it no longer possessed.

The grievor failed to attend the hearing on March 31, 2023.

The Arbitrator previously ordered the grievor to provide an explanation and supporting documentation for the non-attendance by April 17, 2023, failing which the grievances would be dismissed.

The grievor failed to provide any explanation.

Consequently, the three grievances were dismissed.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance alleging the employer breached the collective agreement by issuing a three-day disciplinary suspension after she called in sick for a shift.

The employer maintained the grievor was not ill and had just cause for discipline.

The parties referred the matter to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without written reasons.

The arbitrator found that discipline was warranted and the three-day suspension was appropriate, dismissing the grievance.

The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Employer systemically discriminated against the grievor, a racialized woman, on the basis of race by denying her temporary acting assignments that represented career development opportunities.

The Employer brought a non-suit motion, arguing the Union's evidence was insufficient to succeed.

The Arbitrator granted the non-suit motion, finding that even assuming the Union's evidence was true and drawing all reasonable inferences in its favour, the evidence did not support a conclusion on a balance of probabilities that the grievor's race was a factor in the Employer's decisions to place a non-racialized employee in the acting positions.