Grievance Settlement Board

The parties disputed the interpretation of Minutes of Settlement regarding the grievor's entitlement to reimbursement for travel expenses incurred prior to the settlement.

The Association argued the expenses were not addressed in the settlement, while the Employer argued the settlement resolved all outstanding issues.

The Arbitrator directed the Employer to reimburse the grievor $1445.95 for travel expenses.

In a grievance arbitration, the parties raised several preliminary issues regarding document production and the striking of particulars.

The arbitrator ordered the employer to produce unredacted log books subject to strict confidentiality conditions, and ordered the grievor to return Ministry notebooks.

The arbitrator declined the employer's request to strike paragraphs of the union's particulars that detailed events occurring after the grievance was filed, finding that the post-grievance events were potentially relevant to establishing a pattern of harassment and assessing damages.

In an ongoing grievance arbitration involving allegations of harassment and unjust dismissal, the grievor had previously been granted an accommodation to participate via teleconference due to medical reasons.

During cross-examination, the grievor was highly disruptive, argumentative, and rude.

The arbitrator determined that the current teleconference arrangement was no longer feasible.

To continue accommodating the grievor's medical needs while ensuring the hearing could proceed properly, the arbitrator ordered that the grievor may continue to participate via teleconference, but must do so from the union's office in the physical presence of her counsel.

Counsel for one of the individuals involved requested an adjournment of the arbitration proceedings pending the completion of his criminal trial, citing potential impacts on the issues before the Board and bail conditions affecting his attendance.

The union argued that procedural matters and accommodation requests should proceed in the interim.

The employer opposed the adjournment.

The arbitrator granted an adjournment until September 15, 2019, noting the uncertainty of the criminal trial's completion date.

An exception was made for procedural issues that could be addressed via teleconference or in writing, though medical accommodation requests were deferred until after the adjournment period.

The grievors, fixed-term employees on paid administrative suspension, had eight hours of pay deducted for each statutory holiday that fell during their suspension.

The union grieved the deductions.

The arbitrator allowed the grievances, finding that the letter of understanding between the parties created a complete regime for calculating pay during suspensions based on averaging previous hours worked, and did not provide for any reduction in pay for weeks containing statutory holidays.

The union requested that the complainant be permitted to testify via videoconference based on existing medical documentation, or alternatively, that the hearing be adjourned to allow for further medical evidence to be filed.

The arbitrator denied the request for videoconference testimony on the current record but granted a brief adjournment to provide the complainant one final opportunity to produce medical evidence supporting her claimed inability to testify in person.

The grievor attended a Grievance Settlement Board hearing that concluded by noon.

He then reported to work and was paid for 6 hours.

The union grieved, arguing he should have been paid for 7.5 hours, as he likely would have worked that amount had he not attended the hearing.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the grievor had no right to be assigned more than the minimum guaranteed hours and would not have been assigned court duties due to an ongoing accommodation dispute.

The arbitrator also denied the union's request to withdraw the grievance after argument.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer 2, failed to attend scheduled expedited mediation/arbitration proceedings regarding three grievances.

Despite prior notices and a specific order from another arbitrator warning that failure to attend the April 10 and 11, 2019 sessions would result in the grievances being deemed withdrawn, the grievor again failed to appear.

Consequently, the arbitrator deemed the three grievances withdrawn.

The Union sought disclosure of an Investigation Report in the context of a grievance arbitration.

During a conference call, the parties consented to the disclosure of the report subject to strict confidentiality conditions.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to disclose the report, stipulating that it remain in Union Counsel's possession, be reviewed by the grievor only in counsel's presence, not be copied electronically, and be destroyed at the conclusion of the litigation.

The Association filed a grievance alleging a breach of the Respectful Workplace Policy, workplace discrimination and harassment, and a dispute over the complainant's salary during temporary assignments.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to pay the complainant $6,500 in general damages for the harassment and discrimination allegations.

The Arbitrator also ordered the complainant to repay approximately $5,400 to $5,500 in disputed salary received during a temporary assignment, while finding the Employer was not entitled to repayment for a subsequent period.

The union filed a grievance claiming statutory holiday pay on behalf of an employee at the Thunder Bay Correctional Centre.

The parties participated in an 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.

In a grievance arbitration involving multiple grievances filed by an employee, the Grievance Settlement Board made procedural orders at the request of the parties.

The Board ordered the union to provide full particulars relating to each grievance and the employer to make full disclosure relating to the discipline grievance, to be complied with 60 days prior to the next scheduled hearing date.

The union grieved a five-day suspension imposed on the grievor at the Thunder Bay Correctional Centre.

The parties participated in an expedited mediation-arbitration process.

The union conceded there was cause for discipline but disputed the quantum.

The arbitrator upheld the five-day suspension and denied the grievance.

The Union raised a jurisdictional challenge to the Employer's counterclaim for reimbursement of alleged double payments made to the Grievor while he was receiving WSIB benefits.

The arbitrator issued directions for the parties to provide written submissions on the jurisdictional challenge before proceeding further.

The parties contacted the Grievance Settlement Board seeking an order for particulars in advance of the next scheduled hearing date.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the materials identified as the 'Appendixes to the Report' to the Union, with the condition that the disclosure only be used for purposes related to the proceeding.

The union filed a group grievance on behalf of correctional officers at the Ontario Correctional Institute, alleging the employer breached a Memorandum of Agreement by failing to collapse Resource Position Management (RPM) schedules into the main schedule.

The grievors claimed damages for lost backfill opportunities at regular and overtime rates.

The arbitrator reviewed the relevant agreements and concluded that no one was disadvantaged at the time.

The grievance was dismissed.

The grievor, a Fixed Term Correctional Officer, filed a grievance claiming his hours worked at the Toronto South Detention Centre were not counted when calculating his total hours for permanent position ranking at the Hamilton Wentworth Detention Centre.

The parties had previously agreed to count his hours and he was rolled over into a permanent position with an adjusted Continuous Service Date.

The grievor sought additional compensation including recalculation of vacation time, overtime, and a merit increase.

The Arbitrator found that because the grievor and the institution circumvented the agreed-upon transition process, and since the employer had already recognized his prior hours and rolled him over, the grievance was resolved and the claims for additional compensation were denied.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance claiming his vacation credits and continuous service date should be calculated from March 9, 2009.

The arbitrator found that the issue had already been decided in a previous grievance between the same parties.

The grievor had resigned from his previous position on October 3, 2014, to take a fixed-term position, which constituted a break in service under the collective agreement.

The grievance was denied.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee who transferred from an OAG 6 position at a closing facility to an OAG 4 position at a new facility, alleging a violation of salary protection provisions in the collective agreement.

The arbitrator found that the employee accepted the transfer knowing she would be moving to a lower classification to avoid being placed on the surplus list.

The grievance was dismissed as the employee received the full benefit of salary protection in accordance with the collective agreement and the cross-ministry transfer agreement.

The grievor, a fixed term Correctional Officer, requested a transfer to another facility on compassionate grounds before completing the required one year of service.

He subsequently resigned to take a position with another Ministry, and later obtained a new fixed term contract at his desired facility.

The union grieved, arguing his seniority should carry over.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under Article 18.4 of the collective agreement, the grievor's resignation caused a break in service, terminating his continuous service up to that point.