Vacation quotas and unit allotments must be 'reasonable and must be administered reasonably,' says arbitrator in decision involving Kingston Health Sciences Centre
Employers cannot make it difficult for employees to take time off work for a vacation if it's previously agreed upon by both the company and workers, according to a recent arbitrator’s ruling.
An Ontario arbitrator has ruled that Kingston Health Sciences Centre (KHSC) violated its collective agreement by applying an overly restrictive vacation allotment policy, sending a clear message to employers about the need for flexibility and transparency in vacation scheduling.
The decision, issued by Sole Arbitrator Norm Jesin in Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1974 v Kingston Health Sciences Centre, 2025, addressed two policy grievances filed by CUPE Local 1974. The union alleged that KHSC failed to properly consider employee preferences for vacation dates, instead relying on rigid departmental quotas that led to numerous denials.
The union argued that the employer’s approach breached the collective agreement, which requires vacation to be scheduled at times “mutually convenient to the Hospital and the employee.” The employer maintained that its practices were necessary to ensure adequate staffing and that managers had discretion to grant exceptions.
'Reasonable' vacation quotas, allotments
Arbitrator Jesin found that while employers are permitted to establish vacation quotas or unit allotments, these must be “reasonable and must be administered reasonably.” He highlighted evidence from one department where only one employee could be off on vacation during any 24-hour period, regardless of shift overlap.
“I must therefore conclude that a unit allotment which effectively precludes an employee from taking vacation during a shift when no one else is absent, is indeed unreasonable and its implementation is in violation of the Employer’s obligation to attempt to find time for vacation, which is mutually convenient,” Jesin wrote in the decision.
The arbitrator clarified that the collective agreement does not prohibit the use of quotas, but mandates that “any such unit allotments must be reasonable and must be administered reasonably.”
Jesin added, “In any particular case where a vacation is to be denied because of a unit allotment, the Employer should be able to consider whether sufficient coverage could be implemented by other means, either by backfilling or the use of available part-time personnel. That is particularly the case, the further in advance that a vacation request is made.”
Union requests prohibition of allotments
Jesin also stated that employers should “disclose to the union and/or the employee exactly what the Unit allotment is” to ensure clarity and avoid disputes.
The arbitrator dismissed the union’s request to prohibit all unit allotments but ruled that KHSC’s blanket rule denying vacation during shifts when no other employee is on vacation was unduly restrictive and must be discontinued. He concluded that “any unit allotment must reasonably be related to the operational requirements which the Employer seeks to address” and “cannot be administered in an unreasonable way.”
Technically an employer “can refuse to grant a vacation request submitted by an employee and ensure that an employee’s vacation is taken at a time that is acceptable to the employer,” Stephen Shore, partner at Ogletree Deakins International LLP, previously told HRD Canada. “But, employers should be considering policies which give employees some advance notice stipulating times that workers can book vacation. This reduces any uncertainty between the two parties regarding what they are legally obliged to do.”
“As employers, we need to be aware of what our staff need and where they place importance. Therefore, if vacation time is of critical importance to our workers, then we need to understand the ins-and-outs of vacation entitlements,” Richard B. Johnson, co-founder and partner, Ascent Employment Law in Vancouver, said in a previous piece for HRD.
