Grievance Procedure — Ontario Employment Law
Related Keywords
About Grievance Procedure
In a unionized workplace in Ontario, you don't typically sue your employer in court over a workplace dispute. Instead, you use a formal, multi-step process called a grievance procedure. This process is the mandatory pathway for resolving conflicts that arise under a collective agreement, as required by Ontario's Labour Relations Act, 1995. Think of it as the internal justice system for your workplace, negotiated between your union and your employer.
The purpose of a grievance procedure is to address alleged violations of the collective agreement. This can include anything from unfair discipline or termination, to disputes over pay, benefits, seniority rights, or job classifications. The process is designed to resolve issues at the lowest possible level before they escalate.
Typically, a grievance procedure involves several distinct stages. It often starts with an informal discussion between the employee (usually with a union steward present) and their immediate supervisor. If the issue isn't resolved, the union files a formal written grievance, which moves to 'Step 1'. If still unresolved, it can be escalated to higher levels of management ('Step 2', 'Step 3', etc.). Each step has strict timelines that must be followed. The final, binding step, if all internal stages fail, is grievance arbitration, where a neutral third-party arbitrator makes a final decision. This entire framework is why courts, as seen in many legal cases, will typically refuse to hear a lawsuit from a unionized employee if the core of the dispute is covered by their collective agreement. The specific nature of your rights and the exact procedure are unique to your workplace's collective agreement, making a careful review of that document essential when a problem arises.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a grievance and arbitration?
A grievance is the internal, multi-step process used to try and resolve a dispute with your employer. Arbitration is the final, formal hearing that happens only if the grievance procedure fails. An arbitrator acts like a judge, hears evidence, and makes a legally binding decision.
Can I sue my employer in court if I'm a union member in Ontario?
Generally, no. If the dispute relates to the terms of your employment covered by the collective agreement (like termination, discipline, or pay), you must use the grievance procedure. The courts have consistently ruled that this process, ending in arbitration, is the exclusive forum for such matters.
What happens if I miss the deadline to file a grievance?
Collective agreements have very strict time limits for filing a grievance, often as short as a few days after the incident. Missing a deadline can result in your grievance being dismissed without being heard on its merits, so it's critical to act quickly.
Can I file a grievance for workplace harassment or discrimination?
Yes. Most collective agreements contain clauses that prohibit harassment and discrimination, allowing you to file a grievance. This runs parallel to your right to file a claim at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, and you may have to choose which forum to proceed in.
My union steward isn't taking my issue seriously. What are my options?
Your union has a legal 'Duty of Fair Representation' to not act in a manner that is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. If you believe they are failing this duty, you can file a complaint against the union with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
When should I consult an employment lawyer about a grievance?
While your union is your primary representative, you might consult a lawyer if you believe your union is failing in its duty to represent you, or if your case involves complex legal issues that overlap with areas outside the collective agreement. A lawyer can advise you on your options, including a potential complaint against the union itself.
Common Scenarios
- A warehouse employee is suspended for three days but believes the discipline is excessive and not in line with the progressive discipline policy in the collective agreement, so they contact their union steward to file a grievance.
- A public service worker is denied a promotion that is given to a colleague with less seniority, a potential violation of the seniority clauses in their collective agreement.
- A group of nurses files a 'group grievance' because their hospital is consistently failing to staff their unit according to the ratios mandated in their contract.
- A construction worker is fired for alleged insubordination and immediately initiates the grievance procedure through their union to challenge the termination and seek reinstatement.
- An administrative assistant in a unionized university discovers they are being paid less than the rate specified for their job classification in the collective agreement and starts the grievance process to claim back pay.
What You Should Know
- As soon as an issue arises, find and read the grievance procedure section of your collective agreement. Pay close attention to the definition of a grievance and the strict timelines for each step.
- Document everything. Keep a detailed log of events, including dates, times, what was said, who was present, and save any relevant emails or documents. This evidence is vital.
- Contact your union steward or representative immediately. They are your guide and advocate in this process and are trained to navigate the specific procedures in your workplace.
- Follow the process exactly as laid out in your agreement. Do not try to bypass steps or go straight to senior management, as this could jeopardize your grievance.
- If you feel your union is not representing you properly or is dismissing your case unfairly, you should seek independent legal advice to understand your rights regarding the union's Duty of Fair Representation.
Featured Cases
Joseph v. Canada School of Public Service et al.
2022 ONSC 6734 (CanLII) · 2022-12-01Workplace Disputes: Claims of Negligence and Defamation Dismissed
A case involving workplace disputes where the plaintiff's claims of negligence and defamation against employer and individual defendants were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act. The court also addressed privacy torts involving the police and granted leave to amend the claim to focus on actionable privacy torts.
Clout v. Government of Canada
2011 ONSC 6082 (CanLII) · 2011-10-14Workplace Harassment: Court Strikes Claim for Failing Grievance Procedures
A federal government employee's claim for workplace harassment and retaliation was struck down by the court, which ruled that the claims must be resolved through grievance procedures under the Public Service Labour Relations Act. The court also awarded partial indemnity costs to the defendant.
Yeates v. Canada (Attorney General)
2010 ONSC 3407 (CanLII) · 2010-06-09Workplace Harassment and Defamation: Jurisdiction Under PSLRA
A court case involving a CRA employee who alleged workplace harassment, defamation, and destruction of evidence. The court interpreted the Public Service Labour Relations Act (PSLRA) to bar court actions for employment-related disputes, including defamation claims, and held that unresolved grievances do not confer jurisdiction where the PSLRA applies.
O’Loan v. Risinger
2009 CanLII 26358 (ON SC) · 2009-05-27Employment Jurisdiction Dispute: Tort Claims and Collective Agreement
A merits decision involving a dispute over whether the court has jurisdiction to hear claims of conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and slander alleged by an employee against co-workers. The plaintiff argued the claims were outside the scope of the collective agreement, while the defendants contended they fell under grievance procedures. The court must determine if the essential character of the dispute falls within the collective agreement.
Tran v. Lemerz Canada Inc.
2005 CanLII 21106 (ON SC) · 2005-06-09Workplace Discrimination Case: Harassment Based on Race and Origin
A workplace discrimination case involving harassment based on race, colour, and place of origin. The case also addresses the definition of employer and grievance procedures in employment law.
Burley v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union
2004 CanLII 34769 (ON SC) · 2004-11-01Post-Strike Retaliation Case: Grievance Procedure Bars Claims
A merits decision involving a plaintiff who alleged harassment and discriminatory conduct by union members and representatives during and after a strike. The court ruled that the grievance procedure under the collective agreement barred the plaintiff's claims, citing exclusive jurisdiction and statutory fairness concerns.
Canadian Union of Postal Workers v. Canada Post Corp.
1991 CanLII 7245 (ON SC) · 1991-12-16Collective Agreement Dispute: Arbitrator's Jurisdiction and Grievance Procedures
A labour and employment case involving disputes over the interpretation of collective agreements and grievance procedures, including whether an arbitrator's decision improperly amended the collective agreement and whether informal grievance procedures allow reconsideration of prior decisions.
Re Attorney-General for Ontario and Keeling et al.
1980 CanLII 1630 (ON SC) · 1980-03-14Employment Contract Dispute: Statutory Grievance Rights vs. Collective Agreement Time-Limits
A merits decision involving a dispute over whether a statutory right to grieve a dismissal under the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, 1972 (Ont.) overrides time-limit provisions in a collective agreement. The Grievance Settlement Board held that the statutory right could not be limited by the agreement, and the application was dismissed with costs.
Bergeron et al. v. Kingsway Transports Ltd.
1979 CanLII 1734 (ON SC) · 1979-01-30Labour Dispute: Court Jurisdiction and Privative Clauses in Collective Agreements
A labour dispute case involving the interpretation of a collective agreement and the jurisdiction of courts to entertain actions after grievance procedures are exhausted. The court held that privative clauses in the Canada Labour Code bar judicial review of arbitration decisions and prevent courts from acting as appellate tribunals over arbitration boards.
Bergeron et al. v. Kingsway Transports Ltd.
1978 CanLII 1587 (ON SC) · 1978-04-03Collective Agreement Jurisdiction: Courts vs. Arbitration
A labour and employment case addressing whether courts have jurisdiction to determine claims arising from the interpretation of a collective agreement, with the court ruling that arbitration holds exclusive jurisdiction in such matters.
Re Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Toronto Civic Employees' Union Local No. 43 et al.
1977 CanLII 1278 (ON SC) · 1977-06-30Union Grievance: Employer Transfer of Employee with Medical Condition
A labour and employment case involving a union grievance alleging unfair treatment when an employer transferred an employee with a known medical condition to heavier work without notice. The case examines whether an employer has a duty to act fairly in administering collective agreements and whether arbitration boards can interpret collective agreements to include implied duties of fairness.
Re Communications Union Canada and Bell Canada Re Bell Canada and Communications Union Canada
1976 CanLII 839 (ON SC) · 1976-10-15Arbitration and Grievance Procedures in Collective Agreement Dispute
A labor and employment case involving arbitration and grievance procedures under a collective agreement. The dispute centers on whether the arbitration board erred in declining jurisdiction, the nature of grievances as individual or policy-based, and the interpretation of procedural provisions in the collective agreement under the Canada Labour Code.
Re Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Toronto Civic Employees' Union, Local 43 et al.
1974 CanLII 722 (ON SC) · 1974-02-21Labour Arbitration: Grievance Time Limits and Collective Agreement Compliance
A labour and employment case involving a dispute over the arbitration process under a collective agreement, focusing on whether a union's failure to comply with a 15-day time limit for requesting the Minister of Labour to appoint an arbitrator rendered the grievance non-arbitrable. The court held that the Labour Relations Act does not override the specific time limits in the collective agreement.
Re Automatic Screw Machine Products Ltd. and United Steelworkers of America et al.
1971 CanLII 609 (ON SC) · 1971-03-05Collective Agreement Dispute: Arbitration Board's Jurisdiction Challenged
A labour and employment case involving disputes over the interpretation of collective agreements, arbitration jurisdiction, and the processing of group grievances. The arbitration board's handling of a grievance signed by multiple employees and its reliance on extrinsic evidence were challenged, leading to the quashing of the arbitration award and remittal to a differently constituted board.