34 total
Motion to adjourn hearing dates denied pending production of more comprehensive medical documentation.
The Union moved to adjourn the scheduled hearing dates for a termination grievance, citing the grievor's inability to attend due to medical reasons and a recent family bereavement.
The Employer opposed the adjournment pending production of more comprehensive medical documentation.
The Grievance Settlement Board declined the motion to adjourn, finding insufficient information available, but allowed the Union to produce further medical information by a specified date or renew the request at the next scheduled hearing.
Employer's motion for disclosure of mortgage documents and particulars of discrimination allegations granted.
The employer brought a motion for disclosure and particulars in a grievance arbitration concerning the grievor's termination.
The employer alleged the grievor was dismissed for knowingly using a falsified pay stub to obtain a mortgage.
The union claimed the grievor was unaware of the falsified document.
The Vice-Chair ordered the union to disclose the grievor's mortgage applications and related documents, finding them highly relevant to the core issue.
The Vice-Chair also ordered the union to provide particulars of its allegations of discriminatory conduct by the employer.
Employer's request to adjourn grievance hearing dates due to scheduling conflict granted with conditions.
The Employer requested an adjournment of two scheduled hearing dates in November 2011 for a suspension and dismissal grievance, citing a significant scheduling conflict.
The Union opposed the request, noting the grievor had been suspended without pay since July 2009 and desired a prompt resolution.
The Grievance Settlement Board granted the adjournment subject to conditions, including the scheduling of six further hearing dates in January and February 2012 and the preservation of the Union's right to claim verifiable costs resulting from the adjournment.
Employer's request to adjourn grievance hearing granted while grievor remains on long-term income protection.
The employer requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing regarding several grievances, including harassment allegations, filed by an employee currently on long-term income protection (LTIP).
The union opposed the request.
The Grievance Settlement Board granted the adjournment, finding little likelihood of progress at the present time, and directed the parties to contact the Board when the grievor is fit to return to work or after four months have elapsed.
Board assumes jurisdiction over human rights issues related to termination after Tribunal defers proceedings.
The employer brought a motion requesting the Grievance Settlement Board assume jurisdiction to adjudicate human rights issues related to the grievor's termination, after the Human Rights Tribunal deferred the grievor's application pending the grievance outcome.
The union did not oppose the motion.
The Vice-Chair granted the motion, confirming the Board's jurisdiction to consider the employer's conduct in the context of potential Human Rights Code violations, and directed the union to provide particulars of the alleged discriminatory conduct.
Employer's motion granted; grievor's evidence of alleged harassment insufficient to establish collective agreement violation.
The union filed multiple grievances on behalf of a youth services worker alleging personal harassment by management, which he claimed created a poisoned work environment and forced him to transfer to another facility.
The grievor sought damages including $62,000 for moving and related expenses.
After the grievor's evidence in chief, the employer brought a motion arguing the evidence to date disclosed no violation of the collective agreement.
The Vice-Chair issued an interim decision finding that the evidence did not support a violation of the collective agreement that would warrant the requested damages, noting that the grievor's speculations about the employer's motives were insufficient.
Termination under last chance agreement upheld; grievor's dishonesty was not caused by his mental disability.
The grievor was terminated for dishonesty after repeatedly lying to his employer about needing leg surgery to delay his return to work under a last chance agreement.
The union argued that the termination violated the Human Rights Code because the grievor's dishonesty was caused by a mental disability (adjustment disorder or depression) and the stigma associated with it.
The arbitrator found that while the grievor did suffer from an adjustment disorder constituting a handicap, the disability did not significantly impair his cognitive functioning or ability to choose to act otherwise.
The arbitrator concluded that the grievor's continued deceit was a calculated cover-up rather than a manifestation of his illness or an attempt to avoid stigma.
The termination under the last chance agreement was sustained.
Expert psychological evidence regarding grievor's mental disability ruled admissible; objectivity concerns go to weight, not admissibility.
In a grievance arbitration concerning the discharge of an employee for dishonesty following a last chance agreement, the union sought to introduce expert evidence from a clinical psychologist to establish that the grievor's conduct was attributable to a mental disability.
The employer objected to the admission of the expert evidence, arguing that it was unnecessary, that the psychologist was not properly qualified, and that he lacked objectivity.
The arbitrator applied the Mohan framework and ruled that the expert evidence was admissible, as it could provide relevant information beyond the arbitrator's experience.
The arbitrator also found the psychologist to be properly qualified and held that any concerns regarding his objectivity should be considered when weighing the evidence, rather than as a basis for exclusion.
Grievance dismissed; union's attempt to add health and safety claims constituted improper expansion of original grievance.
The Employer raised a preliminary objection to the Board's jurisdiction to hear a group grievance filed by Employment Standard Officers regarding a new workload quota.
The Employer argued the grievance alleged a free-standing violation of management rights, over which the Board lacks jurisdiction, and that the Union's subsequent reliance on health and safety and discipline provisions constituted an improper expansion of the grievance.
The Board agreed, finding that even on a liberal reading, the original written grievance could not be construed to encompass health and safety or discipline claims.
As the Board has no jurisdiction to review a free-standing exercise of management rights for reasonableness, the Employer's preliminary motion was granted and the grievance was dismissed.
Grievance proceedings terminated following withdrawal by the union after mediation-arbitration.
The union filed a grievance against the employer.
Following an extensive mediation-arbitration process, the union withdrew the grievance in consideration of certain undertakings by the employer.
The Grievance Settlement Board formally terminated the proceedings.
Grievance proceedings terminated following withdrawal and settlement.
The Grievance Settlement Board terminated the proceedings.
Grievance dismissed as untimely; Board declined to extend time limits due to significant unexplained delay.
The grievor, a seasonal employee, was not recalled for a third season due to performance concerns.
The employer moved to dismiss the resulting grievance on the basis that it was untimely.
The Grievance Settlement Board found that the grievor was aware of the facts giving rise to the grievance by mid-April 2007, but the grievance was not filed until December 2007.
The Board declined to exercise its discretion under section 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act to extend the time limits, noting the significant, unexplained delay and the fact that the employer had already filled the seasonal contracts for the upcoming season.
The employer's motion was allowed and the grievance was dismissed.
Union's objection sustained; evidence of grievor's strike activity ruled irrelevant and stricken from record.
During an arbitration hearing, the union objected to the introduction of an exhibit and questions regarding the grievor's 2002 strike activity.
The Grievance Settlement Board sustained the objection, ruling that the strike activity was not relevant to the issues in dispute.
Any evidence and particulars regarding the strike activity were ordered stricken from the record.
Nurse suspended for one month and fined for inadequate documentation and improper billing.
The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to appropriately document client contacts, failing to return and maintain client charts, and improperly billing for visits not made.
The Member admitted to the allegations through an Agreed Statement of Facts.
The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct.
Accepting a Joint Submission as to Penalty, the Committee ordered an oral reprimand, a one-month suspension, a $450 fine, and imposed conditions on the Member's certificate of registration requiring education and monitoring.
