Canadian Labour Reporter

JANUARY 13, 2014 8 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2014 Continued from page 6 However, the nurses' association disagreed. The provision in the collective agreement originally instated in the 1980 decision still has relevance today, according to the ONA. The provision "requires allocation of the hospital's retained premium reduction toward improvements to benefits as are listed in (the collective agreement), for example, to improve vision or hearing aid benefits," the ONA said, pointing specifically to the word "improvement." "The phrase 'benefit improvement' requires an attribution of purpose in favour of nurses that is not satisfied by a 'cost im- provement' delivered to the employer. (The provision) creates an ongoing employer obligation that is supported and made transparent by the requirement of an annual report to the local union," the nurses' association continued. Arbitrator James Hayes dismissed the grievance, and deter- mined the provision to have a universal meaning. "The phrase 'benefit improvements contained in this agree- ment,' without a more restrictive definition could only have meant to refer to all of the awarded benefits, seen collectively," Hayes explained. "As I understand the principal argument, the union submits that the parties are required to engage in an annual benefit improvement exercise outside of the normal col- lective bargaining process. Such an exercise, presumably, would be a one-way street upward based upon a fluctuating premium reduction calculation. What benefits might be involved is un- stated. Indeed, apart from receiving information, it is not clear the union would have any role to play at all." Essentially, Hayes said if the intention for the rebate was to be specifically allocated for health benefits, it would have plainly stated as such. It did not. Therefore, the grievance was dismissed. Reference: Guelph General Hospital and the Ontario Nurses' Asso- ciation. James Hayes – arbitrator. Rob Dobrucki for the union, Glenn Christie and Kathryn Meehan for the employer. Dec. 23, 2013. Shop steward says he should have been fired last AS ShOP STEWARD, Tim Lalonde believed he should have been the last crane operator to go at Kamtech Services. The Interna- tional Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 870 filed griev- ances on Lalonde's behalf when the employer instead retained crane operator Marc Vermette for two weeks of work. Lalonde testified site superintendant Blair Smotra informed him on Aug. 30, 2012, that the crane operators at the employer's worksite in Saskatoon would be laid off that day (with the ex- ception of the site's operations foreman, Jesse Pickor). When Lalonde asked Pickor to confirm this information, he was told everyone was being laid off with the exception of an overhead crane operator hired on a temporary basis. With this information in mind, Lalonde asked Pickor for per- mission to leave early. Lalonde was involved in real estate and received a call from a prospective tenant who wanted to see a house for rent. Lalonde testified Pickor gave him permission to leave early. In cross-examination, Lalonde acknowledged he did not appoint another employer to act as shop steward in his ab- sence when he left work early. Smotra testified it was not known the employer required fur- ther work from a crane operator when Lalonde left the worksite. The decision to lay off the crane operators working for the em- ployer on site was made on Aug. 29. When a worksite meeting was held in the afternoon of Aug. 30, a scaffolding contractor requested a crane operator be retained for two weeks to assist moving and dismantling scaffolding. The employer did not retain Vermette until after the work- site meeting which was also after Lalonde had left the work- site, Smotra said. According to the collective agreement, the union said, Lalonde should have been the last crane operator laid off by the employer. The union requested Lalonde be returned to employment and back paid for lost time. The employer, however, testified Lalonde requested permis- sion to leave the worksite before the end of his regular shift. At the time the decision was made to retain a crane operator Lalonde was no longer on site and therefore no longer available to be asked to stay. The employer further argued that, according to its management rights under the collective agreement, it has the authority to layoff any employee when there is a shortage of work on the project. The union filed a second grievance concerning the employer's wage scales, arguing Lalonde was paid at a lesser classification than on his dispatch. The issue before arbitrator William F.J. Hood was whether the employer had any justifiable reasons not to retain the stew- ard and lay off all other crane operators. In his ruling, Hood found Lalonde was given the option to remain on the worksite and complete his shift after being in- formed of the layoff on Aug. 30. Lalonde requested not to com- plete the shift, but to leave early to attend personal business. At the time Lalonde left the worksite, Hood ruled, the employer's decision was to lay off all crane operators. "Had the grievor remained and completed his shift that day, or if the grievor or the union had appointed a shop steward to remain at work for the balance of that shift that day as the shop steward, events would have unfolded differently," Hood said. He went on to say he did not believe Lalonde left the work- site under the impression a crane operator hired on a temporary basis was being retained for work while he, the shop steward, was laid off. "Had the grievor known prior to leaving work that he, the shop steward, was not the last crane operator laid off, it is more probable that an issue would have been made of this at the time and before he signed the termination layoff notice," Hood ruled. He dismissed the grievance. Reference: The CLR Construction Labour Relations Association of Saskatchewan representing Kamtech Services Inc. and the Interna- tional Union of Operating Engineers, Hoisting, Portable and Station- ary (IUOE) Local 870. William F.J. Hood — sole arbitrator. Todd Ver- beke and Blair Smotra for the employer. Cory Crowley for the union. March 27, 2013.

• Cover