|
|
|
CUPW 2011
LIFELINE FOUNDATION
Links to CPC Householder Values and Walks by
FSA
|
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
HEARINGS HELD AT TORONTO, ONTARIO, ON THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1993
BETWEEN:
CANADA POST CORPORATION
Corporation
- and -
CANADIAN UNION OF POSTAL WORKERS
Union
AND IN THE MATTER OF A SERIES OF GRIEVANCES UNDER THE REGULAR ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
ARBITRATOR
P. JOHN BRUNNER
APPEARANCES
FOR THE CORPORATION PAUL MULVIHILL, ROBERT GORDICA LANCE WAINE AND PETER BRENNAN
FOR THE UNION JOE LESPERANCE MARY DONNELLY, MIKE DUQUETTE AND ROBERT IRWIN
AWARD
Pursuant to Article 9.32(5) of the collective agreement, I conducted hearings at the City of Toronto, Ontario, on October 6, 1993, in order to hear and determine a series of grievances under the regular arbitration procedure.
At the conclusion of the argument on each grievance, I delivered oral reasons, giving a brief resume as required by Article 9.32(5)(r) of the collective agreement. I now hereby confirm my conclusions.
1. In the Matter of the Grievance of D. Wray - # 602-92-01507
This is a grievance by Doug Wray dated March 4, 1993, seeking an assignment to a vacancy at the Orillia Post Office as a letter carrier pursuant to article 54.01(a) of the collective agreement. The evidence before me indicates that Wray is an epileptic and that he is unable to drive a motor vehicle. There is medical evidence before me that he is physically handicapped because for non-compensable health reasons and that there is a need for his assignment to a vacancy at the Orillia Post Office. Presently he is working, as I understand it, at the post office location at 280 Progress Avenue in Scarborough, Ontario, while he resides in Stayner, Ontario. This requires him to be driven every day from his place of residence in order to carry out his duties at work.
- 3 -
It would appear that he has applied to be assigned to any number of vacancies but that for reasons which are not explicable, the Corporation has refused to do so, at least as of today. Mr. Mulvihill informs me that there are two part-time vacancies at the Orillia Post Office. In these circumstances, I can see no reason why I should not apply the plain words of Article 54.01(a) of the collective agreement and direct that Wray be forthwith assigned to one of the part-time vacancies at the Orillia Post Office. I am further advised that there may well be one or two full-time positions as well that are vacant at that installation. If that is in fact the case, he is to be assigned to that full-time position. However, I wish to make it clear that I do not wish to interfere with any order of priority as it would appear that there may be another handicapped employee who has sought assignment to this post office location prior in point of time to the application by Wray. I will remain seized of this matter in the event any difficulties arise between the Union and the Corporation in implementing my award.
DATED AT TORONTO this 12, day of October, 1993.
P. JOHN BRUNNER, ARBITRATOR
|
|
|
