P-2013-1041

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE PUBLIC SERVICE ACT

Before

THE PUBLIC SERVICE GRIEVANCE BOARD

BETWEEN

Doug Houghton

Complainant

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)

Employer

BEFORE

Donald D. Carter

Chair

FOR THE COMPLAINANT

Doug Houghton

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Peter Dailleboust Ministry of Government Services Legal Services Branch Counsel

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

July 17, 2013 August 16, 2013

Decision

1The complainant seeks interim relief in this matter. His request for relief states that, on June 10, 2013, he was advised by the employer that his current job as a Field Intelligence Officer at the Central North Correctional Centre was being offered up for province wide competition. It further states that he was advised that, if we were not successful in the competition, he would be eligible to compete for other jobs or be declared surplus and face potential termination of his employment.

2The complainant argues that the employer’s actions were in breach of his employment contract since he had not been issued a surplus notice or vacated the position in any fashion. He further argues that interim relief is required because he would be denied an effective remedy if the employer concludes the competition and removes him from his current position. The granting of interim relief, according to the complainant, would preserve the status quo and not cause undue hardship or inconvenience for the employer.

3The employer’s response to this request takes the position that the complainant does not have an arguable case on the merits but, even if he does, the test of balance of harm favours the employer since the order sought would prevent the planned reorganization of its work force for an extended period of time. Furthermore, interim relief was not necessary in this case since the Public Service Grievance Board could fashion an appropriate remedy if the complainant was successful on the merits.

4After considering the submissions in this matter, the Board has decided that the complainant has not made out a case for interim relief. The Board has reached this decision without making any determination as to the possible success of this complaint and without dealing with the balance of harm. The Board’s decision is based on a conclusion that its remedial powers are sufficiently comprehensive to provide an adequate remedy to the complainant if it should decide that his terms and conditions of employment have been breached. The Board has a broad remedial power that includes orders of reinstatement to employment, the awarding of compensatory damages, and other types of orders to remedy a breach of terms of conditions of employment. These powers, in the Board’s view, would provide the complainant with an appropriate remedy if his complaint succeeds.

5This application for interim relief is dismissed.