Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Cronsberry et al) v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry), 2024 CanLII 96643

GSB# 2023-00900

UNION# 2023-0232-0004

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Cronsberry et al)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry)

Employer

BEFORE

Tatiana Wacyk

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Alex Zamfir Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Felix Lau Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch Counsel

HEARING

September 4, 2024

Decision

1Having regard to the submissions of Counsel, I hereby order the Employer to produce to Union Counsel, by no later than September 19, 2024, all arguably relevant materials related to the grievance before me, including the following:

1. Any documents regarding the decision-making process, or rationale which culminated in the directives from Matt Orok on March 23, 2023, and April 3, 2023, and any subsequent discussion with respect to the implementation of those directives;

2. Any communications or directions provided to AEMs by Rick Watchhorn, Matt Orok, Lindsay Couillard, any Regional Enforcement Operations Manager with respect to commuting between home and office for Canine Conservation Officers;*

3. Any communications originating from inquiries from Matt McVittie regarding how hours of work would be calculated for Canine Conservations Officers arising from the Competition for Job ID 191917 (Canine Conservation Officer);

[While the Union requested a broader order related to all inquiries arising in the context of the Job Competition, it was only able to refer to information regarding inquiries from Mr. McVittie. As other candidates in the Competition were members of the bargaining unit, it was open to the Union to make inquiries to determine if any other communications were exchanged. In the absence of any indication this were the case, a broader order would, as argued by Counsel for the Employer, constitute a fishing expedition.]

4. Any communications between Rick Watchhorn, Matt Orok, Lindsay Couillard, any Regional Enforcement Operations Manager, and AEM who oversees Canine Conservation Officers with respect to the implementation of the directives from Matt Orok on March 23, 2023 and April 3, 2023;* and

5. Any communications between Rick Watchhorn, Matt Orok, Lindsay Couillard, any Regional Operations Manager, or AEM with Human Resources providing input into the directives from Matt Orok on March 23, 2023 and April 3, 2023*.

*The Employer argued the breadth of these orders, i.e., #2, #4 & #5 was too onerous, and submitted that a temporal limit of May 1, 2023, the date of the Grievance, was more reasonable. However, given the narrow focus of the issue in dispute, and the relatively short timeline between the directives at issue and today’s date, I am satisfied that “arguably relevant” remains the more appropriate limit to the Order.