The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986-0530.Georgiadis et al.89-11-29mm GRIEVANCE ;;EiTT;;MENT EMP‘OY#SsDE‘4 COURONNE ML’ONmR,O C$M/lMISSION DE REGLEMENT DES GRIEFS Between: Before: 530/86, 533/86 534/86, 535/86 IN TEE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEWENT BOARD OPSEU (Georgiadis et al) - and - Grievor The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community & Social Services) Employer J. Forbes-Roberts Vice-Chairperson J. Anderson Member I. Cowan Member For the Grievor: M. Ruby Counsel Gowling Strathy & Henderson Barristers & Solicitors FOr the EDDlOVer: 0. Costen Solicitor Legal Serv Hearinqs: ices Branch Ministry of Community & Social Services October 22, 1987 April 5, 1988 June 15, 1988 2 DECISION This is a classification sase involving four (4) grievors. At the time of the grievances they were classified as Clerks II SUPPlY. They seek the classification of Clerk IV Supply. The grievers vork at the Distribution Centre ("the Centre'!) at 909 Bay Street, This relatively nev varehouse is approximate- ly 13,000 square feet in size and in it are stored all Ministry forms (approximately 2000) and publications (approximately 500). The vork force at the Distribution Centre is composed of the four (4) grievors and their Supervisor, Mr. William Tovnsley. Each of the grievors perform all of the functions associated vith the Centre and on a rotational basis stand in for Mr. Tovnsley vhen he is absent on vacation (five veeks per year) or due to illness. It is vorthy of note that in his evidence Mr. Tovnsley described the grievers as I1 . ..the best vorking staff in any of the Minis- tries." The grievors did not seek to compare their duties to those of others already occupying the Clerk IV classification. Rather they founded their claim exclusively on the basis of the Clerk Supply Series Class Standards. Several Position Specifications vere filed in evidence. The effective date of the most current Specification vas May 26, 1987. (The grievances were filed in May of 1986). In the course of his testimony grievor Mitchell agreed that this Specification vas an accurate description of the grievers duties, though he disagreed vith the percentages aportioning time spent on each component. The Preamble to the Clerk Supply Series states in part: Many factors, such as the maintenance of the necessary ledger or other records, inventory control, establishment of minimum-maximum requirements etc., are common to all stockrooms and vary significantly only to the extent that the size of the stockkeeping function varies. Thus, the r 0" '. c i ‘0 ns is cries is the size. as defined in this Dreamble of the stock- keeping function rather than any variatikn in the clerical or administrative functions associated with it. . * . . . . the number of staff required for the operation of a particular unit is the only practical basis of comparison for classification purposes.... . . . wdium Stockroom - This is a stockroom vhich requires a supervisor and tvo to four subordinates. 3 Larae Stockroom - This is a.stockroom vhich requires a supervisor and five to nine subordinates.~ (emphasis added) AS noted above the Distribution Centre operates vith the four grievors and a supervisor, thus fitting the category of a medium stockroom. The Clerk IV Supply Class Definition speaks specifically to positions in a stockrooms. The relevant sections deal vith 1. positions of employees in charge of a specific specialized section of a large stockroom, involving supervision of two or more subordinates and 2. positions of employees who are second in charge of a large stockroom where the organization is not broken dovn into recognised units as above. To qualify for this classification positions must have continuous responsibility for the efficiency of the operations, work assignments and solution of day to day problems and vould assume supervisory charge of the stockroom during the supervisors absence. The grievors do not fit precisely into the first or second category. By virtue of the Class Standards defintions they simply do not vork in a large stockroom, nor is each and every grievor "second in charge". But do they fit the Clerk II Supply Class De~fintion? It states: This class covers the positions of employees performing a variety of routine manual and clerical duties in stock rooms. Under general supervision, thet carry out a number of the various tasks connected with the receiving, storage, handling and distribution of a wide variety of equipment and supplies. They check incoming shipments against weigh bills for shortage and damage in transit; check quantities against packing slips and purchase orders; contact suppliers regarding short shipments, delays, back orders etc; place items on shelves or bins, adjusting bin cards to keep perpetual inventory. They also maintain stock ledgers or cards shoving the receipt and issue of all articles including the value of items on hand. They assemble orders for authorised requisitions; tag and address shipments; contact the conveyor and complete necessary records for the transaction. 4 I The Clerk II Supply definition is clearly lacking in two (2) respects. First, vhile it speaks to the performance of a "variety" of functions it does not contemplate perfcrmanre of each and everv function associated vith the operation as is the case vith the grievers at the Distribution Centre. Second, it offers no recognition of the assumption of Group leader duties in a supervisor's absence again a task performed by the grievers. We find that neither the Clerk II Supply nor the Clerk IV SUPPlY class definition offer a “best fit" for the grievers' positions. The first is too narrow and the second is too expan- sive. Consequently the grievance is alloved to the extent that the Employer is directed to devise a classification which properly reflects the grievors duties and to compensate them accordingly. The Union requests that the avard be made effective April 11, 1984. With respect to retroactivity we make the folloving finding. Betveen spring of 1983 and the filing of the grievance in May of 1986 grievor Mitchell did contact Personnel several times requesting a job audit. Several times he vas told that one vas in progress and that he vould hear when it was completed. In point of fact the audit was completed on April llth, 1984 and the results vere B& communicated to Mr. Mitchell. (The audit confirmed the classification of Clerk II Supply.) While Mr. Mitchell did make an effort, ve find that at no point did the Employer make a representatiun to him that he would be reclas- sified. Bad it done 5.0 then there would have been no reason for Mitchell to attempt to pursue a remedy by filing a grievance. In the absence of such a representation we find that Mr. Mitchell sat on his rights until the grievances vere filed on May 12th, 1986. Consequently in keeping with the Board's jurisprudence retroactive payments are ordered effective twenty (20) days prior to the filing of the grievance. The Board will remain seized in case the parties have difficulty implementing this avard. Dated at Toronto this 29th day of November 1989. I-/ ) ’ ‘:+jy-- ‘-- - _-~ ----------------------------------- .I. Forbes-Roberts, Vice-Chairperson J. Anderson, Member “I dissent” (Dissent attached) 5 DISSENT I have carefully read the decision of the majority in this. case and feel that I must, with respect, dissent from the conclusion reached. At page 4 paragraph 1 it is indicated that while the Cl 2 Supply definition speaks to performance of a variety of functions “it does not contemplate performance of each and every function II . . . . The word variety does not limit the number of functions to be performed and if all of the functions associated with the job were at the Clerk 2 Supply level then performance of them all would be normal. I believe that in this case, all of the tasks performed by the grievors are well within the definition of Cl 2 Supply and that not only does this class offer a "best fit", but in fact a perfect fit. Further, my colleagues have found that absence of the requirement to assume Group Leader duties during a supervisors absence is further reason to conclude that the grievors are wrongly classified. Evidence indicated that the supervisor may be absent in the order of eight weeks per year and that the grievors show his responsibilities on a rotational basis - i.e. for two weeks each. 6 If these acting responsibilities met the requirements set out in Art. 6.1.1 of the Collective Agreement covering Temporary Assignments the grievors would be recognized and rewarded under that Article, not by reclassification. In the result I would have defiied the grievances. I.J. Cowan