Norfolk General Hospital v. ONA

Can the word “maximum” ever mean “minimum”? Two nurses at Norfolk General Hospital argued exactly that — and an arbitrator disagreed, upholding the hospital’s right to cap summer vacation entitlements at two weeks.

Background

Two Ontario nurses employed at Norfolk General Hospital filed grievances challenging the hospital’s denial of vacation leave requests during the summer months of 2023. Ms. Stacey Brown worked a shift schedule designated as “DDNN,” which meant she worked two consecutive day shifts followed by two consecutive night shifts, then had five days off. Ms. Loralie Ferreira worked a “Continental” shift schedule involving 12-hour shifts over a two-week rotating pattern. Both nurses requested vacation leave during the summer months; the hospital approved portions of their requests but denied others. Ms. Brown’s requests for August 25, July 28 & 29, and September 1, 2 & 3 were partially denied. Ms. Ferreira’s requests for June 28, July 12 & 13, and August 4, 5, 9, 10 & 20 were denied. The union grieved these denials as violations of the collective agreement’s vacation leave provisions.

Positions of the Parties

The Ontario Nurses’ Association argued that Article H-1(g) of the collective agreement guaranteed every full-time nurse a minimum of two weeks (75 hours) of paid vacation during the summer months. The union contended that the word “maximum” in the first sentence of the provision was used in a comparative sense—establishing the maximum portion of overall vacation entitlements that could be taken during summer—not as an absolute cap. The hospital maintained that “maximum” had its ordinary dictionary meaning: the upper limit or ceiling on summer vacation that employees could take. The hospital argued that the provision allowed management to limit summer vacation if operational requirements necessitated such limitations, with additional vacation requests beyond two weeks to be granted only on a seniority basis if capacity permitted.

The Collective Agreement Language at Issue

Article H-1(g):

“Full-time nurses may take a maximum of two (2) weeks of their vacation entitlement off during the summer months. When all full-time nurses have had the opportunity to schedule their 2 weeks off then any time remaining will be granted on the basis of seniority.”

Arbitrator Bendel’s Decision

The arbitrator dismissed the grievances. Bendel found that the language of Article H-1(g) was clear and unambiguous. The first sentence establishes that full-time nurses may take no more than two weeks of vacation during the summer period. The second sentence contemplates that once all nurses have had the opportunity to take two weeks off, any additional vacation time remaining may be accommodated on a seniority basis—but only if the hospital is in a position to grant it. The arbitrator rejected the union’s contextual interpretation, finding that there was no valid reason to distort the plain meaning of “maximum.” The provision’s obvious purpose is to ensure equitable access to summer vacation (giving all nurses a fair opportunity to take two weeks off) while allowing the hospital to accommodate additional requests based on operational capacity and seniority. Bendel noted that the word “maximum” appears 21 times in the Central Collective Agreement and once in this local appendix, and there was no basis for interpreting it as meaning “minimum” in this context.

Citation: Bendel, Arb. · 2026 CanLII 29