Injunctive
relief for SOSA TP&E crews
June 12, 2006
Brothers and Sisters,
Last week, CPRail Manger of TP&E Anthony Manconi arbitrarily
decided to cease the practice of supplying change/storage rooms
for crews on the SOSA. These rooms were used for the changing and
storage of wet and contaminated work clothes as mandated by the
Canadian Occupational Safety and Health (COSH) Regulations and
the Canada Labour Codes.
In other words, the change/storage rooms were somewhere to take
off their filthy, chemical soaked and wet clothing and store them
away from their bedrooms, to keep from ingesting the contaminants
and smelling the creosote, oil, diesel, gas, and /or anti freeze
all night, while they dried.
The men and women of SOSA had been supplied with change/storage
rooms on the motel crews for over ten years and rightly so. Now,
a company representative, for whatever reason determined that they
would not be allowed these rooms anymore. Though we had tried to
dissuade Mr. Manconi from making a decision of this magnitude without
carefully thinking it through, he obviously did not listen. This
was not only a matter of simple human dignity, it is a matter of
Health and Safety that the HRSDC has already ruled on twice in
Southern Ontario. I even sent Mr. Manconi a letter, days prior,
when I heard a rumour that he was planning such a move. A letter
that he did not even respond to. Though I guess you could say that
perhaps his response was the cessation of the company supplied
change/storage rooms.
I was contacted by Kyle Rightmyer from the SOSA Tie Crew about
the change rooms being officially taken away on Sunday June 4th
(the first day that they were removed) and I immediately filed
a grievance and sought injunctive relief with CROA arbitrator Picher.
Health and Safety rep Bill Brake and Kyle also filed a 127.1(1)
complaint with HRSDC on the matter as well.
Mr. Picher requested a call between the company's attorney and
ours, David Brown, for Friday, June 9. Due to the "Weber" decision
of a few years ago, injunctive relief on Collective Agreement issues
could no longer be sought from the courts. It now had to be granted
by an arbitrator. Up to this point in time, no one had been able
to get injunctive relief from an arbitrator until a grievance was
in the final stage of the grievance procedure, and an arbitrator
had been "seized" to hear the matter.
For this reason we felt that Mr. Picher might state that he did
not have jurisdiction to grant the injunction, as the grievance
was only days old.
But David was convinced that he had a proper, albeit unique,
argument. Mr. Brown argued that Mr. Picher was already "seized" in
essence, as we are bound by collective agreement to take all unresolved
grievances to CROA, so Mr. Picher was already in effect "seized" as
he is the CROA arbitrator. David made this argument on Friday and
Mr. Picher, took the weekend to deliberate.
This morning, Mr. Picher again discussed the matter with David
and the company attorney and as you can see from the attached award,
he agreed with Mr. Brown's argument. This is precedent setting
arbitration law and it is not only serving us well in this instance,
but will aid all rail Unions who deal with CROA for years to come.
I am immensely grateful to David for his dedication and his brilliance.
This is only the first hurdle to get over in this case, as you
can see from the award, we will be arguing it at CROA in July.
But it is an important hurdle. Though the company would not go
there willingly, for now, the safe course has been followed.
Stay safe out there, and remember... Your safety is much too important
to leave in the hands of management. Look after yourselves and
each other.
Fraternally,
Bill Brehl
President
TCRC MWED
Related documents >>>
