OGSB 2026

The union filed a grievance alleging the grievor was bullied and harassed by a co-worker, and that the employer failed to properly investigate the complaints and punitively transferred the grievor.

The arbitrator found that the interactions between the grievor and her co-worker constituted a mutual personality conflict rather than workplace harassment.

The arbitrator also found the transfer was for legitimate operational reasons.

However, the employer violated the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the collective agreement by failing to investigate one of the complaints and failing to provide the grievor with written results of the investigations into the other complaints.

The grievor was awarded $4,500 in general damages for these procedural failures.

In a grievance arbitration concerning a job posting for a Senior Economist position, the parties engaged in settlement discussions but did not resolve the grievance.

The arbitrator issued an interim order requiring all parties, including the grievor and the incumbent, to keep all information relating to the grievance, including the Association's book of documents, strictly confidential and to use it only for the proceeding before the Board.

Following an award reinstating the grievor with full compensation, the union brought a motion for a partial payment of compensation pending the final calculation of the total amount owed.

The employer opposed the motion, arguing it was an improper request for interim relief that failed to follow the Grievance Settlement Board's procedural rules.

The Arbitrator found that the motion was a procedural step in implementing the merits award, not a pre-merits interim relief application.

Balancing the harm to the grievor from ongoing financial loss against the unlikely risk of overpayment, the Arbitrator ordered the employer to make a partial payment of $75,000 plus interest.

The Union filed policy and group grievances regarding Flex Work Arrangements (FWA) for Field Staff.

The arbitrator ordered that Field Staff whose FWAs were suspended in 2020 due to the pandemic will have them reinstated no later than 30 days prior to the Return to Office (RTO).

The Employer will also consider new FWA applications from field staff no earlier than 30 days prior to RTO, and may change flex days or work assignments, with employees having the option to decline the FWA to keep their assignment.

The grievor, a warehouse worker, received a Letter of Reprimand after striking a pillar while operating a forklift in reverse.

The union grieved the discipline, arguing the grievor was not looking backwards for as long as alleged and had not received refresher training upon returning from maternity leave.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the discipline was reasonable as the grievor should not have needed a reminder of the fundamental safety rule to be aware of obstacles while operating a forklift in reverse.

The union filed a grievance seeking the return or payout of the grievor's excess vacation entitlement from 2021.

The employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the grievance as untimely, noting it was filed over three years after the issue was first raised.

The arbitrator found the union failed to make a case for extending the time limits, as the delay was substantial and the grievor had managed to file and settle other grievances during the same period.

Furthermore, the arbitrator held that even if the grievance were timely, the collective agreement clearly did not permit the carryover of more than one year's vacation entitlement or the payout of unused days.

The grievance was dismissed.

The Union filed grievances alleging the Employer failed to make timely payments to five grievors pursuant to various Minutes of Settlement.

The Employer provided no explanation for the delays, which ranged from several months to unpaid as of the hearing date.

The Arbitrator found that a mere declaration of breach would be insufficient to deter future delays or recognize the impact on the grievors.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to pay $500 in damages to each of the five grievors.

The Union grieved that the Employer violated the Collective Agreement and the Probation Office Recruitment Process (PORP) Memorandum of Agreement by filling a Probation Officer vacancy in Kenora through a roll-over instead of a lateral transfer.

The Arbitrator found that under the PORP MOA, the vacancy should have been filled through a lateral transfer, as there were two candidates on the lateral transfer list at the time.

The grievance was upheld, and the Employer was directed to offer the position as per the lateral transfer log and adhere to the PORP mechanisms in the future.

The Association filed a grievance on behalf of the complainant regarding the processes followed by the Respectful Workplace Office (RWO) in dealing with a complaint.

Following a hearing, the Arbitrator ordered that the Letter of Counsel and the DMA Close-out Letter issued to the complainant be deemed null and void and removed from all files.

The Arbitrator further ordered that the RWO file and all documentation relating to the complaint be deemed null and void as against the complainant and not be relied upon for any purpose.

The Association filed a grievance alleging the grievor was subjected to anti-Black racism, harassment, and discrimination.

The Employer brought a preliminary motion to strike numerous paragraphs of the Union's particulars on the basis that they were untimely or precluded by the 'three-year rule'.

The arbitrator found that the Employer had not waived its right to object to timeliness and declined to exercise discretion under s. 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act to extend the time limits, noting the lack of explanation for the delay.

Applying the three-year rule, the arbitrator struck most of the historical particulars, finding they were not probative of the timely allegations and could not serve to demonstrate a violation of the collective agreement.

The Employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss six grievances filed by the Union on behalf of a correctional officer, arguing undue delay pursuant to the doctrine of laches.

The grievances involved allegations of harassment, discrimination, and a disciplinary suspension.

The Arbitrator found that the delay of up to four and a half years was unreasonable and attributable to the Union, which failed to advance the grievances through the local mediation-arbitration protocol.

However, balancing the rights of the parties, the Arbitrator concluded that while the Employer suffered some prejudice due to faded memories, it was not sufficient to make it clearly improper to proceed.

The motion to dismiss was denied.

In a discharge grievance, the union sought production of certain documents.

The arbitrator ordered the employer to produce all communications between the complainant and any other witnesses or potential witnesses, including two individuals on a bus on February 4, 2024.

The production was made subject to strict confidentiality conditions, including redaction of identifying information and destruction of documents at the conclusion of the proceedings.

The Association filed a grievance alleging the employer failed to accommodate the grievor's request to telework five days a week in 2024.

Prior to the hearing on the merits, the Association sought production of documents relating to the employer's handling of the grievor's previous accommodation requests between 2018 and 2023.

The employer objected, arguing the documents were irrelevant and barred by the Board's three-year rule.

The Arbitrator dismissed the request for production, finding that the historical documents were not arguably relevant to the specific 2024 decision made by a different manager, and lacked a clear nexus to the positions in dispute.

The union grieved a five-day suspension imposed on the grievor for using excessive and unnecessary force by placing an inmate in a headlock.

The matter proceeded through the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process.

The arbitrator found no breach of the collective agreement but exercised discretion to reduce the suspension from five days to three days.

The Union filed a group grievance alleging the Employer breached the Extended Hours Memorandum of Agreement regarding flex days and shift schedules.

Following case management discussions, the Union raised concerns about outstanding pre-hearing production.

The Arbitrator found the requested documents and information arguably relevant and ordered the Employer to produce them by April 30, 2026.

The Employer brought a motion to strike portions of the Union's Statement of Particulars in a grievance arbitration, arguing that allegations dating back to 2011 violated the Board's 'three-year rule'.

The Union argued the rule breached natural justice or, alternatively, that exceptions should apply due to the grievor's fear of reprisal.

The Arbitrator upheld the validity of the three-year rule, finding it consistent with natural justice and the expedited arbitration process.

The Arbitrator struck the particulars relating to the alleged 2011 co-worker prank and subsequent ostracization due to the extreme delay and prejudice to the Employer.

However, the Arbitrator allowed evidence regarding the supervisor's 2011 response to the prank, finding it relevant to establishing the origins of the alleged recent pattern of harassment.

In a grievance alleging harassment and failure to accommodate, both parties brought preliminary motions regarding the production of the grievor's medical records.

The Employer sought full disclosure of the treating physician's file, while the Union sought strict restrictions on the dissemination of the records, including prohibiting the Employer's instructing client from viewing them.

The Arbitrator ordered the Union to produce the complete medical file to its external counsel for vetting and redaction of irrelevant information, rather than allowing the grievor to vet the records herself.

The Arbitrator also ordered strict safeguards limiting the dissemination of the medical records to specific Employer representatives and requiring their destruction at the conclusion of the proceedings.

The Union requested that three grievances relating to the assignment and dispatching of mobile station ambassadors be heard together.

The Employer opposed the request, arguing they should be heard consecutively.

The Arbitrator granted the Union's request, finding sufficient overlap in the legal and factual issues, witnesses, and evidence to justify hearing the matters together.

The Arbitrator concluded that proceeding in this manner would be more efficient and would not prejudice the Employer.

The parties agreed on consent to an order regarding the disclosure of the grievor's medical and WSIB files.

The arbitrator issued the order, which requires the union and grievor to produce all arguably relevant medical and WSIB records to employer counsel.

The order imposes strict confidentiality conditions, limiting the use of the documents to the arbitration and restricting who may access them.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer incorrectly calculated the grievor's merit date following a salary progression freeze.

The employer raised preliminary objections based on delay, failure to disclose a prima facie breach, and res judicata.

The arbitrator issued a procedural order setting a timeline for the exchange of particulars and evidence regarding the delay issue ahead of the scheduled hearing on the preliminary objections.