Canadian Labour Reporter is the trusted source of information for labour relations professionals. Published weekly, it features news, details on collective agreements and arbitration summaries to help you stay on top of the changing landscape.
Issue link: https://digital.hrreporter.com/i/1307221
up to a failure to properly protect
the health and safety of nurses
under the Ontario Occupational
Health and Safety Act (OHSA)
and the collective agreement, said
the ONA.
The collective agreement re-
quires LTC homes to "inform em-
ployees of any situation relating to
their work which may endanger
their health and safety, as soon as
it learns of the said situation," pro-
vide proper safety training, and
ensure the proper measures under
the OHSA are carried out in the
workplace.
The arbitrator noted that man-
agement has the right to run oper-
ations as they see fit, as long as they
comply with collective agreement
and statutory obligations and pro-
tect the health and safety of em-
ployees and residents.
The arbitrator also noted that
during the hearing process, the
LTC homes agreed to use "their
best efforts to obtain PPE," main-
tain physical distancing protocols
in the homes, and ensure proper
safety training is provided as soon
as possible.
The homes also agreed to advise
staff of residents who test positive
for COVID-19, advise the joint
health and safety committees of
the availability of PPE, and com-
municate any hazards it discovers
to employees. Sanitization pro-
cesses such as enhanced cleaning
and disinfection of common areas
and provision of hand hygiene
agents would also be consistently
followed.
The arbitrator found it was nec-
essary to make orders to provide
direction and to help resolve dis-
putes. The orders "are not made
based on any finding of fault," said
the arbitrator, but rather "in order
to further peaceful labour rela-
tions and to provide for the health
and safety of employees, pursu-
ant to the collective agreements,
OHSA, and [provincial] direc-
tives."
The arbitrator ordered:
• the LTC homes to provide
nurses with access to "fitted N95
respirators, equivalent or great-
er protection and other appro-
priate PPE (appropriate gowns,
gloves and face shields) when
assessed by a nurse at point of
care to be appropriate and re-
quired."
• nurses to perform a "point of
care risk assessment" before all
of their interactions with resi-
dents in a home, to determine
what PPE was necessary.
• both the LTC homes and nurses
to "engage in the conservation
and stewardship of PPE."
• all LTC home staff to wear N95
masks whenever medical proce-
dures that could generate aero-
sols are performed.
• the LTC homes to provide
"a sufficient supply of all ap-
propriate sizes of fit-tested
N95s" for nurses along with
pursuing "all proper avenues
to procure sufficient supply of
all PPE."
• that there be no intimidation,
threatening, or coercion of nurs-
es who exercise their right to ac-
cess PPE.
• the LTC homes to "implement
administrative controls such as
isolating and cohorting of resi-
dents and staff."
• the LTC homes to "make all
reasonable efforts to cohort
staff between suspected or con-
firmed COVID-19 residents and
residents who have not been in-
fected."
Reference: Participating Nursing Homes and ONA. John Stout — arbitrator. John Bruce, Ian Dick, Mitchell Smith,
Bob Bass, Mary-Claire Bass for employer. Philip Abbink, Janet Barowy, Danielle Bisnar, Sharan Basran, Beverly
Mathers, Pat Carr, Nicole Butt for union. May 4, 2020. 2020 CarswellOnt 15022
Arbitrator's orders came after ONA raised safety concerns
Attendants couldn't work without requalification
accordance with the Canada La-
bour Code. Rouge couldn't coerce
anyone to end their leave early or
attend training while on leave, but
flight attendants had the discretion
to voluntarily end their leave early
to attend requalification training.
In mid-2015, three flight at-
tendants — Sarah Drouin, Amelie
Perreault, and Julie Demontigny —
took maternity and parental leave.
Drouin and Perreault were sched-
uled to return on July 10 and con-
tacted Rouge a month earlier about
training, but Rouge informed them
that training wasn't available until
Aug. 8. They each used one week's
vacation and went without pay
for three weeks until the training
started.
Demontigny anticipated return-
ing to work on June 12, so she con-
tacted Rouge in mid-May about her
requalification training. However,
she was told no training was avail-
able until July 5 — although Rouge
didn't mention training that was
being conducted before her return
date. Demontigny used vacation
credits and then went without pay
for two weeks until the training be-
gan.
A fourth flight attendant, Emily
McKenzie, planned to return from
maternity leave in March 2017.
Shortly before then, she was told
there was a shortage of trainers
and it could take months before
she could receive requalification
training. She agreed to take initial
technical training (ITT) intend-
ed for new flight attendants, for
which the airline would pay half of
her regular wage. McKenzie used
two weeks of vacation followed by
three weeks without pay before
starting the ITT.
The union filed a grievance
claiming Rouge violated the collec-
tive agreement, the Canada Labour
Code, and the Canadian Human
Rights Act (CHRA) by failing to
provide the flight attendants with
the training they needed to return
to their positions after their leave.
The arbitrator noted that the
collective agreement didn't require
Rouge to immediately retrain flight
attendants after their qualifications
lapsed, so it didn't appear to violate
the collective agreement. However,
both the legislation "set a floor with
respect to human rights" that can't
be contracted out of, the arbitrator
added.
The arbitrator found that the
flight attendants experienced an
adverse impact because they took
maternity and parental leave —
which was connected to their sex
— but being qualified for flight du-
ties was a reasonable requirement
for the job. The issue was whether
Rouge could reasonably accommo-
date the flight attendants.
The arbitrator found that it
would be too much to retrain all
flight attendants returning from
leave immediately, so accommoda-
tion would involve training within a
reasonable period of time — which
could mean one-on-one training
if the wait was for an extended pe-
riod. There was no obligation to
pay unqualified flight attendants
returning from leave because "re-
quiring work in return for compen-
sation is a reasonable and bona fide
requirement," said the arbitrator.
The arbitrator found that
Rouge failed to accommodate
the four flight attendants. Drouin
and Perreault contacted Rouge
a month before their return, so
making them wait two months af-
ter that was unreasonable. As for
Demontigny, Rouge should have
informed her about an option
of returning a few days early for
training available then, the arbi-
trator said.
The arbitrator also found that
although Rouge accommodated
McKenzie with the ITT, she still
suffered a loss of income because
Rouge didn't try to get her back
to full status within a reasonable
amount of time.
The airline was ordered to make
its "best efforts to address each in-
dividual case and accommodate
flight attendants returning from
maternity and parental leave to the
point of undue hardship."
Reference: CUPE and Air Canada Rouge. John Stout — arbitrator. Gillian Round for employer. Aug. 5, 2020. 2020
CarswellNat 3215