MagnetawanCollege

Sarah Kearney worked as a part-time teacher in the early childhood education (ECE) program at MagnetawanCollege. Full-time teachers at the college were unionized and their collective agreement provided recognition and management rights articles as follows:

Article 1 Recognition: The Union is recognized as the exclusive collective bargaining agency for all academic employees of the Colleges engaged as [full-time] teachers,

counsellors and librarians,

. . .

Article 6 Management Rights: It is the exclusive function of the Colleges to:

(i)maintain order, discipline and efficiency;

(ii)hire, discharge, transfer, classify, assign, appoint, promote, demote, lay off, recall and suspend or otherwise discipline employees subject to the right to lodge a grievance in the manner and to the extent provided in this Agreement;

(iii)manage the College and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the right to plan, direct and control operations, facilities, programs, courses, systems and procedures, direct its personnel, determine complement, organization, methods and the number, location and classification of personnel required from time to time, the number and location of campuses and facilities, services to be performed, the scheduling of assignments and work, the extension, limitation, curtailment, or cessation of operations and all other rights and responsibilities not specifically modified elsewhere in this Agreement.

Kearney’s qualifications included a Bachelor of Arts degree, Bachelor of Education degree, and a diploma in child studies. The college posted a job for a full-time teaching position in the ECE program. Kearney applied for the job and was interviewed. Subsequently she was advised that she was the successful candidate. A letter of employment from the college stated that the general terms of her employment would be as outlined in the collective agreement, indicated her starting salary, and informed her that she would be on probation for one year. The letter also stated that her appointment was conditional upon her enrolling in a Master’s program in the field of early childhood education during her first year of employment. Kearney was asked to agree to the terms of employment by signing and returning a copy of the letter to the college and she did so. Kearney started in her full-time position in August. In her first year the college reminded Kearney about the condition relating to the Master’s degree and inquired about her progress. She advised that she was in the process of applying to a program. In the middle of May the college formally wrote to Kearney advising her that she had until the end of the month to show that she had complied with the condition of employment; however, she did not do so. Kearney was dismissed and the letter of dismissal indicated that the reason for her dismissal was the failure to meet the condition of employment, namely enrolment in a Master’s program. The union filed a grievance on Kearney’s behalf challenging the dismissal. Subsequently, there was an arbitration hearing.

Questions

  1. What arguments will the employer make at an arbitration hearing to justify the termination?
  2. What arguments will the union make at the arbitration hearing to challenge the dismissal?
  3. Assume that you are the arbitrator and explain what your decision would be. Include any remedies that you would order.

The purpose of this incident is to highlight the following key points:

1)in a unionized workplace individual bargaining of the terms or conditions of employment is not possible, and

2)in a unionized workplace reinstatement of a terminated employee is a possible remedy

This case incident is based upon Board of Governors of Loyalist College v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union 2003 CLLC 220-056.

1