GRAVENHURST, ON – The dispute between workers and a seniors care home hasn’t been completely settled.
Earlier this week, workers at Sienna Senior Living in Gravenhurst planned to picket outside the building because they were owed back pay from 2017. An official with the facility said yesterday that the demonstration never happened because an agreement was reached.
According to Orion Kereszpesi, the CUPE national staff rep, that statement wasn’t entirely correct, but it was a first step in the right direction.
“We’re optimistic,” Kereszpesi said, speaking the MyMuskokaNow.com newsroom today. “We’re always in good faith toward the employer, but we are going to make sure it gets done.”
“If it isn’t fully resolved soon, then we could be in another situation where members are talking about picketing again.”
According to Kereszpesi, what happened was Sienna offered payouts to the employees, but didn’t show the exact math of how they got to the number.
He said there could be risks for anyone who signs off on the deal and takes the money now. The dangers are that once the numbers are crunched, they could end up being owed or more, or worse, they could end up having to pay some of it back to Sienna.
“We understand those who have taken the money because some folks can’t necessarily wait any longer for it,” Kereszpesi said. “We have been advising members who can afford it to wait until Sienna has actually given the math before signing off on the money.”
The staff rep said the employer was ordered to provide the payments and math to how it calculated them by an arbitrator in November of last year. He added the order included a direction for the payout to happen in a timely fashion.
Kereszpesi said the union will still be fighting to get the exact math for those who take the money. Getting the exact math and making sure the money is paid out soon are the top priorities, according to the staff rep.
Sienna Senior Living was asked for my MyMuskokaNOW for comment on when they plan on releasing the exact math, and responded with the following statement:
“This information is not correct. An arbitrator did rule that we should proceed to communicate the changes to staff. A comprehensive spreadsheet was provided approximately six months ago to the union.”
