HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-2011.Perkons.92-12-18 fa
ONTARIO EMPLOYES DE LA COURONNE
CROWNEMPLOYEES DE CONTARIO
GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE
SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS
t80 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 210o, TORONTO, ONTARIO. A45C, 1Z8 TELEPHONEITELEPHOtiF N.81 326-;238
W. RUE DUNDAS GUEST, BUREAU 2100, TORONTO (ONTARIO). M5G 1Z8 FA CS8V1LE,TFLEC0PfE 726-;395
2011/87
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
OPSEU (Perkons)
'Grievor
and
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of the Environment)
Employer
BEFORE: M. Gorsky Vice-Chairperson
G. Majesky Member
M. O'Toole Member
FOR THE N. Wilson
UNION Counsel
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
Barristers & Solicitors
FOR THE S. Patterson
EMPLOYER Counsel
Legal Services Branch
Management Board of Cabinet
HEARING January 28, 1992
May 4 , 1992
i
1
D E C I S 1 0 N
The IsSues
The Grievor, Imants G. (Gus ) Perkons, whose month of hire was
November 1973 , filed a grievance on July 17, 1987 claiming that he
had been improperly classified as an Environmental Technician 3 ,
requesting that he be "properly classified and be given full pav ,
benefits , .and interest , retroactive to October 2 , 1985 . "
The grievance before us raises two issues :
1 . What was the proper classification of Mr . Perkons between
October 2 , 1985 and September 1 , 1987?
2 . If his grievance succeeds , what is the retroactivity dates
applicable to the Grievor?
The position taken on behalf of the Grievor was that he was
improperly classified as an Environmental Technician during the
period October 2 , 1985 to August 31 , 1987 , and that he should have
been c- lassified as an Environmental Officer 4 , with full
retroactivity from October 2 , 1985 with respect to pay, benefits ,
togethe=r with interest on all amounts payable to him.
i
Q.
7
In *the alternative, it was submitted that the Grievor should
be paid at the Environmental Technician 4 level from October 2 ,
1985 to September 30 , 1986 , together with benefits and interest ,
and at the Environmental Officer 4 level , with interest and
benefits from October 1 , 1986 to August 31 , 1987 . It was agreed
that between October 1, 1986 and September 1, 1987, Mr. Perkons was
paid at the rate payable to an Environmental Officer 3, although he
was not , in fact, classified as such during that period. Although
The Environmental Officer 'class standards show that they were
issued on July 5 , 1988 , with an effective date of September 1 ,
1987 , counsel agreed that they were retroactively applied from
October 1 , 19.86 . This was the subject of comment in McColl , at pp.
3-4 .
The position taken on behalf of the Ministry was: (1 ) That Mr,
Per'kons had been properly classified as an Environmental Technician
3 between October 2 , 1985 and September 1 , 1987 . ( 2 ) In the
alternative, that the Environmental Officer class standards were
not appropriate for him prior to October 1 , 1986 , when it was
agreed they became effective, and if they were appropriate for him
after that date, his proper clasification was as an Environmental
Officer 3. ( 3 ) In the further alternative, if he was entitled to be
classified as an Environmental Officer during the period October 4 ,
1985 , to September 1 , 1987 , his proper classification was as an
E .O. 3 .
i
J
]i7dy..l.L!-ot1nd '
Some of the background facts relevant to this case are set out
in Mc-C911, GSB 295188 ( Barrett ) :
Mfr . McColl , who is an abatement officer with the
Sault Ste. Marie district office of the Ministry , filed
three classification grievances in the wake of Grievance
Settlement Board decisions in Baldwin and Lxng , GSB
,,539184, and Pinc�e and wolanilak, GSB 540184. When Mr .
McColl filed his first grievance in May, 1988 , he was
classified as an environmental technician 3 . As a result
of numerous classification grievances from environmental
technicians throughout the province and recognition by
the Ministry that environmental technician class
standards were obsolete, a new class standard for
environmental officers was produced in 1987 . At about
the same time, the Baldwin and Lyng decision was released
which required the Ministry to create a new
classification for the grievors . The subsequent
and Wolani,uk award was issued in June , 1987 and , before
its release , the parties agreed that "without prejudice
to or concession to the claims and grievances of other
environmental officers - who allege that they are
improperly classified that the grievors would be
reclassified to the same classification as Baldwin and
Lyng when that classification was finally determined" .
In September, 1987, the employer issued the environmental
officer series with six classification levels , as-:+i
reclassified all of the environmental technicians inr-O
this series . Generally speaking , environmental
technician 3 ' s became environmental officer 3 ' s , and
environmental technician 4' s became environmental officer
4 ' s . In this process , Mr. McColl was classified an
environmental officer 3 .
Many more classification grievances arose out of
this reclassification process because in the reassessment
of all of the individual abatement officers on their job
duties, some were reclassified as EO3 but some were
"promoted" to EO4 . . . .
The Evid CCt��
It was the subject of agreement that the new class standards
for environmental officers issued on July 5 , 1988 , and shown to
J
4
have come into effect on September 1 , 1987 , were applied
retroactive to October 1 , 1986 . Mr. Perkons was reclassified as an
Environmental officer 4 on November 8 , 1988 , retroactive to
September 1 , 1987 . His present classification is that of an
Environmental Officer 5 .
The Evidence
Mr. Perkons testified that: -
( 1 ) He was at all material times employed in the Technical Support
section. At the date of his grievance he was a Water Resources
Technician at the Ministry' s office at 119 King Street West in
Hamilton, Ontario, being the West Central Regional Office. His
duties and responsibilities at the relevant times involved
working in the area of surface waters, including rivers ,
streams and lakes, and he was also engaged in duties
pertaining to the quantity and quality of subsurface waters .
(2 ) He was a graduate of Wilfred Laurier University in Geography,
Mr. Perkons commenced employment as a contract employee with
the Ministry in May of 1973 , obtaining permanent status in
November of 1973. His first employment was as a Public Health
Inspector in Toronto, where his duties involved surface water.
In April of 1974, when the Ministry was restructured on a
i
regjonal basis, he was transferred to the Hamilton office as
a Public Health Inspector 3 , dealing with surface water .
( 3 ) When the Environmental Technician class series was created in
1975 , he was classified as an Environmental Technician 3 .
At the material times he reported "functionally" to the
Regional Hydrologist although he reported "officially" to the
Water Quality Chief , Stan Irwin, or to the Evaluatof_,
depending on the existing structure. He noted that there was
no Regional Hydrologist at certain times, referring to the
summers of 1985 and 1987 .
a
( 4 ) At the relevant times his duties and "responsibilities related
to the evaluation of surface water in the West Central Region
which is encompassed by a triangular area , the points being
the Village of Shelbourne , Long Point Park and the Niagara
River. Part of his duties involved him in the conduct of
special studies; on-going monitoring programs , including the
review of programs; investigating reported instances of
interference with normal water flow and complaints relating to
water quality and quantity .
( 5 ) Sometime in the late 1970 ` s or. early 1980 ' s his duties and
responsibilities changed when the Region became involved with
waste water assimilation studies that had previously been
carried out by the Water Resources Branch in Toronto. He
i
a
6
described these studies as being very intensive in the use of
manpower and equipment, and as requiring co-ordination of the
efforts of several branches of the Ministry, including: Water
, Resources , Laboratory Services as well as district offices
within the Region, at a time when there were no technical
support officers in the district offices .
( 6 ) The studies involved, in part, the determination of whether -a
receiver body (a lake -or river ) had the capacity to accept
certain levels of pollutants without causing impairment to the
natural environment, including organisms . In order to carry
out these studies it was necessary for him to engage in
literature searches and perform field studies .
( 7 ) . He had participated in a few field studies when they were
performed by the Water Resources Branch. When the Region took
over this function his involvement became greater, and by 1981
he had participated in at least three of them. He started to
perform the actual organization work, determining what had to
be accomplished and what items would have to be obtained in
order to carry out the studies. The Regional Hydrologist
would outline to him the general nature of the study and it
was then up to him to organize people and resources so that it
could be carried out. The number of persons required to carry
out a study varied from as few as four to as many as 22 . The
i
7
work was carried on seven days a week, 24 hours a Slav and
irvolved land , rivers and parts of Lake Ontario .
( 8 ) He interviewed and offered positions to contract employees to
participate in the studies , some of whom were hired for the
summer under U . I .C. programs .
( 9 ) As part of his overall responsibilities , he was .involved in
obtaining approval for the studies , alone or with his
supervisor .
( 10 ) The studies described by him required that he have a high
degree of technical expertise in sampling tecniques , and he
had to ensure that those working under him ( both permanent an(.i
contract employees ) were properly trained .
4
( 11 ) His involvement in the waste water assimilation studies Look-
up approximately 75 per cent of his time in field work during
the summers , and, prior to the carrying out of the field
studies , most of his time was involved in organizing the
studies, including meeting with laboratories and arranging for
the setting aside of staff time'.
X12 ) His role in carrying out the assimilation studies remained the
same during the period of 1985 to 1989 .
a
8
( 13 ) He was responsible for the administration of the water quality
program from 1974 , when the West Central Regional Office
assumed responsibility for that program, until he left the
section in 1989. There was a network of approximately 90 water
quality stations located on rivers where sampling was carried
out in accordance with a pre-determined schedule , and he was
involved in both sample collection and the review of data
obtained from sampling. He submitted samples to the
laboratory in Toronto and received and reviewed the analytical
data obtained to see if there were any abnormal findings , and
saw to it that the data 'was put onto the Ministry' s Corporate
Data System. When he noted an abnormality disclosed by the
data received from the laboratory , depending on its
significance, he would report this either to his supervisor or
to the District Officer.
( 14 ) When he saw evidence of an illegal industrial discharge , an
abatement program might be established by a district office ,
or he might examine the matter fiurther to ascertain the
cause. Charges were not laid_ under relevant legislation
solely on the basis of the initial sampling results, but might
follow further investigation based on the sampling . The
decision to lav a charge did not rest with the Technical
Support Section which performed field work to collect data
that might be used as evidence, some of which could be
i
'3
furnished by him, but with the Investigation and Enforc:emenr_
f Branch.
( 15 ) The ultimate responsibility with respect to matters relating
to water quality rested' with the Water Quality Chief , Mr .
Perkons ' responsibility being to ensure that the monitoring
network was functioning properly and was addressing the needs
of the Region and the district 'offices .
( 16 ) He estimated his involvement in the network as taking lap a
minimum of 50 per cent of his time on an annual bases , with
100 per cent of his time being taken up with special studies
during the summer .
( 17 ) Nhere interference complaints were made to the R,,,j1ort� 1
office , it was his responsibility to investigate anti resolvN
them where possible . When necessary , he was required to yo
into the field to ascertain the cause of the problem and to
sut39est solutions at the site, if this could be done. when in
the field investigating - interference complaints, he conducted
water quality tests and measurements, including those relating
to water flow in streams . When a resolution could not �>r�
achieved at the site , he would summarize his findings in a
report to his supervisor with recommendations for action ,
which recommendations were always accepted. The number of
inrerference complaints that occurred in a year ranged from U
10
to 'over 20, depending on climatic factors. When the number of
complaints was on the high side, this was usually due to
climate-related matters which did not lend themselves to any
man-made resolution .
( 18 ) Some responsibility with respect to the ' U.I .0 program, above
desctribed, was first assigned to him in 1983 , and this
responsibility was increased in 1985 , when he was required to
arrange for and conduct interviews and hire applicants for
both the district offices and his own section. He served as
regional co-ordinator and this responsibility took up
approximately one month of his time a year .
( 19 ) Between 1985 and 1988 he had, on at least one occasion ,
testified in court for the Ministry . Referrence was made to
a case that was heard in December of 1986 involving the
prosecution of a paper company. In that case he received a
telephone call which required his urgent attendance at the
court house where he was asked to advise the Ministry lawyers
on techincal matters which had a bearing on their cross-
examination strategy. The following day he testified as an
expert witness on hydrology. He was chosen because he was the
most expert person in the area of hydrology then working in
the area.
i
( 20 ) He -- was left largely on his own to carry out the duties
a
a3si9ned to hiss. when special studies were being set up , he
would be briefed, after which he was expected to carry out the
necessary day-to-day work while managing his own work
assignments and maintaining his own schedule, without having
to obtain prior approval .
( 21 ) He reported to supervison on matters that he believed would he,
or special interest because of : their political implications ,
an example being a case where a report was sent back to him
from the lab which indicated that there was an unusaliv high
levels of mercury in a river system.
( 22 ) He prepared reports in writing and circulated them to
supervision as well as maintaining the file .
( 23 ) Her was involved in the preparation of several external reports
which were signed by the Regional Hydrologist or thr
management person carrying out that function, and he was
responsible for carrying out a number of technical functions
relevant to the preparation of reports . In addition to the
waste water assimilation studies , reference was made to
study performed during the summers of 1984 - 1988 involving
the St . Catharines Pollution Control Plant . This was
described as a major field project which occupied a good deal
of his time during the summers in question. The report
12
included the documenting of the source of polution leading to
beach closures in the St. Catharines area , and the study
represented a complete review of aquatic impact by the City of
St. Catharines and included the source of all discharges
(which were said to number in the hundreds ) . All of the
information obtained by him was documented and quantified, and
the studies were continued until employees of the City were in
a position to perform them. `
( 24 ) In 1986 , he presented a seminar in the form of a hydrological
studv of the St . Catharines area , as part of a program
relating to the assessment of water resources . Thos:-
attending were persons involved in surface water studies who
were employed by the Ministry of the Environment.
( 25 ) In March of 1987 , he participated in a seminar conducted by
the Region on the subject of hydrology relating to the Niagara
Peninsula, including the Welland Shipping Canal .
( 26 ) He took a number of continuing education courses including
some given by the American Environmental Protection Agency in
Cincinnati. Other courses involved the conduct of waste water
surveys and the statistical analysis of data.
( 27 ) He raised the matter of his classification with the manager of
the Technical Support Section in 1979 , when he indicated his
_ II
i
• 13
concern that his job duties and responsibilities had changed
greatly over the previous five years and requested a review of
them with a view to obtaining a reclassification. Hr' was
advised that, in management's view, his position specification
(Exhibit X ) was accurate, that it would not be re-written, and
that his classification was consistent with his duties and
responsibilities .
( 28 ) On October 2 , 1985 , he' sent a 'memorandum ( Exhibit 5 ) to his
supervisor, Stan Irwin, the then acting Chief, Water Resources
Assessment :
This is to request that my classification be reviewed .
It is my belief that for a number of years [ 13 have been
given responsibilities beyond the scope of my job
description . Your immediate attention to this matter is
appreciated.
Mr. Irwin ' s reply is as follows :
I will dig up your old job spec , review it with you ,
change as necessary & submit via Ray to Personnel fnr
classification review.
The job description referred to in Exhibit 5 is Exhibit 4 .
( 39 ) In Exhibit 6, which is a performance appraisal dated ,august 6 ,
1986 , at page 2 , at the bottom of Section III , the words
appear: "Job spec has been re-written and will be submitted to
Personnel soon . "
14
( 30 ) He did not file a grievance earlier because he wished to give
management a reasonable opportunity to complete the
reassessment of his duties and responsibilities and to effect
a reclassification. He concluded, in July of 1987 , that the
only way to obtain redress would be to file a grievance .
( 31 ) He also referred to his performance review dated October 22 ,
1987, where, at p.2, under Section III, the words appear: "Job
Spec is being rewritten to current activities . " He did not
recall having seen the job specification in the process of
revision.
( 32 ) He ' reviewed Exhibit 9 (annexed as Appendix 1 ) , which is his
position specification and class allocation form dated
September 23 , 1988 , with an effective date of September i ,
1987 , which he regarded as setting out his duties and
responsibilities fairly accurately during the relevant period
from 1985 to September 1 , 1987 ,
( 33 ) In commenting on Exhibit 6 , being his 1986 performance
appraisal ,at p. 4 , under Section III "Expectations and
Objectives , " where the report states :
Gus should do more memo and report writing . Projects
will be selected with the Regional water Resources
Assessment Officer which Gus can handle from start to
finish with a report- as the end result .
he testified that Mr. Irwin had informed him that if he wished
to receive a higher classification he should produce more
i
i
i
1 �
reports in a publishable format . In response to r.his
suggestion, he took a report writing course and cr,mplNtNd a
number of projects up to the report writing stage . Prior to
this time he had been too busy' to get to the report writing
stage .
( 34 ) He agreed with the statement contained at the top of p. 3 of
Exhibits 6 and 7 , dealing with "Planned Management Support ,-"
that state: "Projects and progress are reviewed often . "
( 35 ) In referring to the performance report of October 22 , 1987
( Exhibit 7 ) , Mr. Perkons stated that he was then doing more
report writing in a form suitable for external distribution .
In reply to a question in cross-examination, he stated that
this was not the first work done by him in that format and
that he had written up the St . ;Catharines study , althougn he
ac,•knowledged that it was not ; in final form suitable for
external distribution.
i
( 36 ) Further in cross-examination, in referring to Section III ,
"Expectations and objectives , " commenting o n the statement :
"Gus should continue to do more memo and report writing , " he
stated that this reflected the fact that he was continuing to
dc. more memo and report writing at that time.
10
i37 ) In ' cross-examination, referring again to Exhibit 7 , Mr .
Perkons stated that where the report , in Section IV, "Plant
Management Support" stated: "Projects in progress are reviewed
often, " this only referred to progress as it related to
projects.
( 38 ) He drafted a manual interpreting data obtained in waste water
assimilation tests which was intended to assist person's
working in the area who were interested in learning how to
conduct such studies and to create typical modelling language
that could be used in the process .
( 39 ) He acknowledged that for a period of six years his 'involvement
in waste water assimilation studies was under a Regional
Hydrologist . He also acknowledged that when the Hydrologist
was Dale Henry, the latter was quite involved in the studies ,
as was Mr. Van Briesbrook, who was the Regional Hydroloyist at
another time . Mr. Henry was also quite involved in data
analysis . When there was a Regional Hydrologist on staff ,
that person would sometimes attend at a site where a project
was being carried out, but not for the purpose of supervising
him.
( 40 ) There were two Service Water Technicians in his office .
Unlike Mr . Perkons , who reported to the Regional Hydrologist
I •
• l"
was on staff , • the other technicians reported to the Regional
P-iologist .
i
Stan Irwin testified on behalf of the Employer , as follows :
� 1 ) He is now the co-ordinator for the Niagara River Improvement
Project in the West Central Region and has been employed with
the Ministry for approximately 25 years . In 1967 he join;ia
the Ontario Water Resouurces Commission as a Field Technician
in Toronto . From 1966 to 1977 he held a number of posit-, ons
with the Water Resources Branch which became parr- of the
Ministry of the Environment in • 1972. In 1974 he became Chief
of Survey Programs in the Water Resources •Branch. In 1977 he
transferred to Hamilton where he served as Regional
Hydrologist . At that time he had no employees under him brit
wDrked along with Mr . Perkons .
( 2 ) In 1978 he was promoted to Surface Water Evaluator , and Mr .
Perkons , along with other professional and technical staff
reported to him.
( 3 ) In 1985 he became Chief , Water Resources Assessment unit .
This position involved the same employees with whom he had
been associated previously, but he now functioned at a higher
level . 'fir. Perkons continued to report to him directly .
( 4 ) In `1990 he assumed his present position.
( 5 ) He described his view of the duties and responsibilities
carried out by the Grievor from 1985 to the date of the
grievance. He referred to some of Mr. Perkons ' field duties
and responsibilities while carrying out water quality
monitoring activities in the network established for that
purpose and while carrying out specialized studies relating to
the network.
( o ) He described the network as having been established by the
Water Resources Branch for the purpose of collecting samples
and performing field work as part of a larger program. The
samples were usually collected once a month at pre-determined
locations throughout the districts . Annually, representatives
of the Water Resources Branch and the regions would meet tc�
decide what stations would be established to perform sampling,
the frequency of sampling and the parameters to be employed.
Other agencies were sometimes involved in the determination of
what stations would be included in the program. He referred
to the Grand River Conservation Authoritv which assisted his
unit in carrying out sampling in their watershed. Mr . Irwin
described the parameters as setting out the acceptable levels
of certain pollutants .
i
Representing the West Central Region were Mr. Perkons an(l the
Regional Hydrologist ( if one was on staff ) .
( 7 ) Once a program was established, the carrying out of sampling
became routine and mechanical . Sampling was carried out at
pre-determined locations , usually employing stainless steel
buckets to gather water from a stream, and then pouring the
water into bottles , with a preservative being added tc t
battles in some cases . ' labels were prepared for the t,ott_ les
and forms completed for submission to the laboratory .
( 8 ) Once samples were collected, Mr . Perkons ' role was to submit
them, obtain lab reports and enter the data onto t..hF�:
computerized laboratory information system maintained by in
Toronto. Periodicallv , he would scan the results received r\-
hi.m to see if there was any information that did not prcperi,:
belong to a data set. If there was , he would check with k'he
laboratory about the validity of the information . This was
said to be a simple task and locating errors in the data was
a fairly mechanical task. Mr. Perkons reviewed these reports .
( 9 ) Mr. Perkons' supervision of summer students employed to carry
out monitoring took up approximately 50 per cent of his time .
( 10 ) Tho- Regional Hydrologist had -the responsibility to decide
whether a study, such as the waste water assimilation survey
?l)
was necessary, when to carry it out , and what results were
being sought . After a survey was completed , it was also the
Hydrologist's responsibility to prepare the final report. Mr.
Perkons' responsibility was to work along with the Hydrologist
in establishing the field component and in dealing with such
matters as the frequency of. sampling , parameters to be
analyzed, staff and equipment needed, and such logistical
considerations as the shifts the staff would be required to
work and where they would be housed. Mr . Perkons , under the
Hydrologist, was responsible for ensuring that each member of
the staff carrying out the survey was aware of his individual
responsibilities and how they. were to be carried out .
( 11 ) The Hydrologist was primarily responsible for the survey, and
Mr. Perkons acted as his assistant. One of Mr . Perkons '
responsibilities was to order the data obtained in a form
suitable for analysis by the Hydrologist. This might involve
his preparing graphs, charts , means, averages , and other
unsophisticated statistical data, which was intended to assist
the Hydrologist to interpret the data.
( 12 ) Analysis of the data by the Hydrologist was for the purpose of
arriving at a conclusion as to whether the water quality
objectives had been violated and to ascertain the cause of a
violation and its effect. This process was assisted through
the use of a computer with variable inputs to the model along
I
i
�1
with variables obtained from the data . The Hydrologist was
also responsible for changing variables to simulate conditions
that might be encountered, such as changes in biological
activity in a stream and how a stream would flow un+4er
different conditions . The information obtained from the
surveys could be used in establishing minimum certificates of
approval for new or existing facilities which discharged
substances .
( 13 ) When there was a complaint that the flow of a stream had been
significantly interfered with, Mr . Persons might be required
tc investigate the cause and see whether the matter could be
remedied on the spot . He was not the only person with this
responsibility , especially in years with considerable
rainfall . In years when there were only a few complaints , hi.-
:.ould handle all of them. one year all nine staff member:-,
( including surface and ground water staff ) were required t:j
investigate water interference complaints. Upon investigation
of a complaint, a memo would usually be prepared by the person
carrying out the investigation and placed in the file. A
memo, in these circumstances, might run anywhere from a single
page in uncomplicated cases to two to three pages in more
complicated situations .
( 14 ) Persons assisting in carrying out studies were not always
untrained and might only need some additional training in
taking measurements in the field, the use of equipment and the
reservation of samples .
les .P
( 15 ) In the case of the U.I .C. programs referred to, the branch was
given a salary allotment by the federal government to provide
jobs and training to persons receiving unemployment insurance
benefits. The selection of the persons to be hired was up to
the person responsible for the particular program but in sroMe
years this responsibility was delegated to Mr . Perkons . In
his unit , the persons usually carrying out the
responsibilities were the Hydrologist and the Biologist .
( 16 ) Mr . Perkons acted in a liaison capacity with representatives
of the U . I .C. on matters pertaining to the programs ,
particularly to ensure that the persons hired would receive
the top-up to their U . I .C. payments .
( 17 ) Mr. Irwin referred to the statement in Section I of Exhibit 6 :
"He planned most of the field study for the first Sr_ .
Catharines PCP study, The survey went well . " He described
Mr. Perkons ' responsibility to select the type and number of
sample bottles to be used, their proper submission, the number
of staff required, what each staff member would be required to
do , and his responsibility to ensure that each member carried
out his -responsibilities using proper field equipment .
i
_3
( 18 ) In - referring to projects to be selected with the Ri-gional
water Resources assessment officer, in Section III of Exhibit
6 , Mr . Irwin testified that he was referring to the
responsibility of the Hydrologist . He wished hr . Perkons to
become more involved with planning, interpretation of data and
final report preparation when a survey was required , as well
as with the planning of the field activities , collection of
data , etc . The reason for including this statement wis
because Mr. Perkons had-previously requested re-classificat: ir.n
a:� an ET4 , and Mr. Irwin was of the opinion that by taking r;n
the additional responsibilities referred to in Section !II , n,:,
would be performing duties and responsibilities required of ar,
ET4 .
( 19 ) Referring to the item at the top of page 3 of Exn ,,bit F :
"Projects and progress are reviewed often , " Mr . Irwir. :rata(,
that he was referring to the Grievor' s work being reviewed by
the Hydrologist and, occasionally, by himself . Mr . IrW1.11
believed that the Hydrologist would, at all times, be aware of
what Mr. Perkons was doing, and would review his day-to-day
progress. In the case of projects , Mr. Irwin, as Chief , would
frequently be informed of their progress by Mr . Perkons .
I
( 20 ) Mr. Irwin also testified with respect to Exhibit 7 , being the
Grievor ' s performance appraisal dated October 22 , 1987 ,
i
covering the period July 1986 'to October 1987 . There is a
2�
reference in Section I of the performance appraisal to: "Wrote
up draft of lagoon winter survey - requires finalizing. " Mr .
Irwin stated that this report was never put -in final form.
( 21 ) Referring to the portion of Section I which states : "Planned
Hamilton Harbour Input Monitoring program - being carried out
by student under Gus ' direction, " he stated that this program
required weekly monitoring similar to the Provincial ,eater
Quality Monitoring Network program, but with respect tc
tributaries leading into Hamilton Harbour. Mr. Irwin was not
aware if a report was prepared by his office with respect to
this program.
( 22 ) :'fir. Perkons was not involved in enough memorandum and report
writing , and it is for this reason that a recommendation was
inserted in Section III "Expectations and objectives" to
assist him in developing the necessary skills to achieve a
higher classification.
( 23 ) Referrintg to Exhibit 5 , where, Mr.' Perkons had requested a
classification review, he stated that , in his view, he was
non-committal in his response, and that he had not indicated
that he regarded the Grievor as being entitled to a higher
classification. However , he agreed to the updating of the
Grievor ' s position specification and to a submission to the
i
I
personnel department for a classification revie=w. This was
done when the position was within the Environmental Technician
series .
( 24 ) Although Mr. Perkons had acted as a resource person to persons
outside of the Ministry, Mr . Irwin did not regard this as :
"big thing, " as all employees were required to function in
this capacity. He acknowledged that his expectation was thjtt
Mr. Perkons would carry- out his function as a resource person
within his areas of expertise . '
( 23 ) He also acknowledged that although a number of employees would
be involved in water interference complaints, Mr. Perkons was
the employee with the primary responsibility in this area .
( 26 ) Mr . Van Briesbrook was the Regional Hydrologist at s<;mc f Lmr
prior to 1985 , but that the position was vacant during the
summer of 1985 . Mr. Henry replaced Mr . Van Briesbrook Ln
September of 1985 and occupied the position until June of
1987 . The position was again vacant during the summer of 1987
after which time a Mr . Vickers occupied it .
( 27 ) In cross-examination, Mr. Irwin testified that in addition to
himself and Mr. Perkons two other staff persons (a Biologist
and a Biological technician ) , who were experienced in water
_5
interference complaints , were involved in surface wat-,r
interference duties .
( 28 ) Mr. Perkons' studies were not carried out under the Biologist .
When Mr. Perkons was carrying out a study, it was in
conjunction with the Regional Hydrologist . Mr . Irwin could
not' say positively what studies were being performed by -.%lr .
Perkons during the summer of 1985. In addition, Mr. Irwin was
not able to say what , if any, study the Grievor was involved
in during the summer of 1987 . He acknowledged that there
might have been studies with which the Grievor was iro.-c l v ed
during that period.
F
Although he first stated that the St. Catharines studv was not
being conducted during the summer of 1985 , he later
acknowledged that that study was carried out from late 1964 tc,
1988 . He recalled that the major portion of the' studv w,--is
performed during 1986 .
( 29 ) The Regional Hydrologists, who were bargaining unit personnel ,
were professional engineers during the relevant period and had
considerable expertise in survey modelling . Mr. Henry was
said to. have some degree of expertise in surveys, particularly
as they related to infrastructure, and Mr . Irwin referred to
tests relating to storm sewers .
i
17
( 29 ) The Hydrologist decided the structure of a survey , how the
goals were to be accomplished, . and the data that was being
sought for computer modelling purposes . The data collected
would then be inputed into a Streeter-Phelps model for self-
purification streams. Mr. Perkons main responsibility was for
for field operations, setting up the survey and overseeing iz�
so that the data could be collected and reported to the
laboratorv.
( 30 ) In carrying out sampling , automatic recording machinery was
used to measure water flow, temperature , pH, etc .
( 31 ) Mr. Irwin denied that Mr. Perkons was considered to be an
authority on sampling and sampling methods . It Was his
evidence that everyone in the unit was just as well qualified
in this area .
( 32 ) He was unaware of Mr. Perkons having been an instructor at a
Ministry of the Environment course where all environmental
officers were taught about proper sampling methods . He said
that if this was the case , it must have. happened after ht,
assumed his new position.
( 33 ) In cross-examination , when referred to the statement in
Exhibit 6 , at page 2 , "Job Spec has been re-written and will
28
be submitted to Personnel soon, " he acknowledged that his
manager, Ray Stewart, did not , in fact submit it .
(_34 } In referring to the statement at page 2 of Exhibit 7 , "Job
Spec is being re-written to current activities , " he stated
that this was only being done because he was aware that the
Environmental Officer class series was going to be introduced
and he wished the position specification to reflect the nc--'w
class series . He did not regard the Grievor ' s job as being
any different but felt that "new buzzwords were needed . " It
was his view that the Grievor ' s report--writing and data
interpretation skills would have to be improved -in order to
have his classification changed.
( 35 ) He saw no significance in the fact that the unit did nc)t
always have a Regional Hydrologist . In his view, even wh:_n
there was a Hydrologist in the unit, he (Mr.. Irwin) furnished
supervision to Mr. Perkons.
( 36 ) 'He regarded 50 per cent of the work performed by Mr . Perkons
as being carried out in accordance with a set pre-determined
routine.
( 37 ) He regarded the major survey work with respect to the St .
Catharines study as having been performed when Mr. Henry was
the Hydrologist. There was some field work, in the nature of
i
sampling , performed between 1984 and 1988 to ascertain th(,
sources of contamination. These included sampling of beaches. ,
i
streams and using a dye to establish the time of travel .
( 38 ) The responsibility for deciding how the investigation would be
carried out in connection with' the St . Catharines study ( as
was the case in all other studies ) rested with the
Hydrologist .
The parties agreed that Mr . Perkons ' job duties and
responsibilities did not change significantly between 1985 and the
date of his grievance. If Mr. Perkons was wrongly classified as •3n
ET3, and is entitled to a declaration to this effect , he could r; -�:
be regarded as properly within the Environmental Officer class
series until that class series came into effect on October 1 , 1.92,6
(which date was the subject of agreement ) .
The class standards for the Environmental Technician 3 and 4
classifications ( Exhibit 2 ) are as follows :
ENVIRQNMENTAL TECHNICIAN 3
This class covers positions invc, 1vin,l
inspections and investigations of the full range :.:f
activities in the environmental assessment and pollurion
control field . In some positions , they r_ondu(�t
investigations of pollution of air (stationary and mobile
sources ) , land or water , ' including noise , and plan ,
organize and conduct assessment surveys and monitoring of
the natural environment. others in the environmental
monitoring function involve responsibility for the
selection, operation and maintenance of specialized ,
JU
complex electronic , chemical or mechanical air, water or
wastewater monitoring equipment in field locations
resulting in the production of validated data for use in
environmental assessment programmes . In still other
positions , employees in this classification may assist
professional staff or senior technicians in the clean up
of hazardous spills, or in conducting applied research
projects or surveys to evaluate new technology and
methods , assess the natural environment , effect
corrective action in the case of malfunctioning pollution
control equipment , or in the processing of approvals .
The compensable factors ' at this level are typically
reflected as follows :
1 . Knowledge -
Work , .rz�quires the technical expertise ,
approaches and practices to deal effectiveiv
with a wide variety of environmental matters
such as inspection of newly installed or
malfunctioning private sewage disposal systems
of all sizes ( e.g . serving schools , nursing
homes , etc . ) , industrial air and water
pollution control and monitoring equipment ,
communal water and sewage treatment projects ,
waste management sites and systems , an,x
vehicle emissions to ensure that they comply
with established practices and standards , or
to qualitatively assess the effects of
polluting discharges on the surrounding
environment . ( e.g. determine wastewater loading
guidelines for municipal / industrial
discharges) . Such knowledge is normally
acquired through graduation from a recognized
institute of technology or community college
plus several years - of related experience .
2 . Judgement-.
Work is performed under minimum supervision
with considerable functional independence .
Mature judgement is exercised in decision-
making when unusual or unpredictable
situations arise. Matters deviati-ng from
established practices and precedents are dealt
with at this level and only sensitive or
contentious matters are referred to
supervisors . Independent judgement is
exercised in the preparation of comprehensive
technical reports on all investigations ,
inspections or other projects , including the
interpretation and analysis of physical and
� I
I
31
field data and laboratory results , mak-, nq
recommendations where necessary .
3 . Accountability:
These positions are accountable for the
accuracy and completeness of the data
collected and of the investigations
inspections conducted . Decisions involve the
nature and amount of data to be collected ,
actions taken , recommendations made , aria can
usually be based on precedent or established
practice. Errors may cause inappropriate
action and expense by the :Ministry , industry ,
or private individuals .
4 . C.Qntacts
Contacts may be with private individuals ,
small business proprietors or
technical and operational staff of industry ,
municipalities ,' their own or other MinzstriF11'3
and/or the Federal Government .
The propose of the contacts will be to
exchange or collect information and data , give
advice , make recommendations or enforce
regulations. on occasion, it may be necessary
to appear as a witness providing technical
evidence and/o.r information before pub— i i,:
bodies such as environmental he,, r1nyS
municipal councils , ratepayers '
or courts of ' law . In all c-c;ntacts I_tif,
employee is assumed to officially represen
the Ministry and present Ministry policy .
April 197
ENVIRQNMENTAL TECHNICIAN 4
This class covers positions of employees
involved in conducting and co-ordinating techn.i-rally
complex and specialized work in environmental assessment
and pollution control . Thev either function as
recognized experts in specialized work such as the
inspection/ investigation -of complicated malfunctioning
municipal or industrial water, wastewater or emission
control installations, or co-ordinating the investigaraun
and clean up of spills of hazardous materials ,
investigating fish kills , or conducting studies of the
natural environment , etc'. , OR they exercise advanced
32
responsibilities across a range of several arias in the
environmental and pollution control field, functioning as
group leaders providing technical direction , co-
ordination and training to other technical staff ,
including instructing in technical training programmes.
The compensable factors at this level are 'typically -
reflected as follows:
1 . Knowledge- '
now 1 edg e: '
Work requires the technical expertise ,
flexibility and depth of background to deal
independently with a wide variety of
unpredictable environmental problems or with
specialized problems where the individuals '
knowledge may be the only guide to action .
Such knowledge is normally acquired through
graduation from a recognized institute of
technology or community college plus many
years of progressively responsible related
experience.
2 . Jud eat•
Work is performed under general direction.
Judgement is employed to marshal the necessary
human, material and/or information resources
and to organize studies , surveys ,
investigations or inspections independently: ,
referring to supervisors only in the evr,nt )f
very' unusual circumstances , and periodicaily
to advise on progress. Judgement is exercised
in applying general technical principles to
new problems which do not respond to precedent
or established practice.
3 . Accountabilitv:
These positions are fully accountable for the
technical accuracy and quality of data
collected or produced and for comprehensive
technical reports with recommendations as a
result of their decision on necessary
information; format and - cont ent of reports;
and appropriateness of recommendations . Such
reports are suitable for distribution outside
the Ministry after only general review by the
supervisor. Poor recommendations could result
in considerable monetary loss to the Ministry
or others and in damage to the Ministry ' s
credibility and prestige .
i
s'
4 . Contacts :
work involves a wide variety of conrinul_n,j
contacts with governmental and industrial
officials at the operational , technical ,
professional and management levels such as
Chief Operators : or Superintendents of water
and sewage treatment plants , industrial plant
superintendents ,: technical , scientific and
engineering officials of their own Ministry ,
other Provincial Ministries , the Government_ of
Canada and international agencies .
The contacts are for the purpose of exchanging
information , giving advice , publishing
interpretative data , making recommendations ,
planning. co-operative studies , or enforcing
regulations . It may be necessary occasionally
to appear as a'-witness or technical expert
before public hearings , such as the
Environmental Hearing Board , or a c:cur% f
law. In all contacts , the employee is aSsumed
to officially represent the Ministry as an
expert, and to present Ministry policy .
April 1975.
The Environmental Technician 3 class standard envisages
different types of jobs : ( 1 ) Investigation of pollutic:n of air ,
land or water including the conduct of assessment survevs and thr-
monitoring of the natural environment. ( 2 ) Environmental
monitoring involving the selection, operation and maintenance of
equipment in field locations resulting in production of valiriated
data for use in environmental assessment programmes . ( 3 )
Assisting professional staff or senior technicians in the cleanup
of hazardous spills or conducting applied research projects or
surveys to evaluate new technology and methods , assessing the
I
natural environment , effecting corrective action in the case of j
I
c
34
malfunctioning pollution control equipment or in processing
approvals .
Counsel for the Union stated that if Mr. Perkons was only
involved in one of the three types of positions contained in the
class standard , then his classification as an Environmental
Technician 3 might have been warranted. However, it was submitted
that he was involved in all three kinds of positions described in
the class standard. Under the first category, counsel referred to
yr . Perkons ' involvement in investigating complaints dealing with
surface water interference . Under the second category, reference
was made to Mr . Perkons ' involvement in environmental monitoring
which took up approximately 50 per cent of -his time. Partic-ular
reference was made to the water quality monitoring network, and MIr.
Perkons ' specific responsibilities in that area . In the - t_hird
categorv , reference was made' to Mr. Perkons assisting t�:, .
Hydrologist in conducting applied research projects or surveys to .
assess the natural environment .
Referring to the Environmental Technician 4 class standard ,
counsel for the Union submitted that Mr. Perkons fit the
description after the word "OR" : "They exercise advanced
responsibility across a range of several areas in the environmental
and pollution control field, functioning as group leaders providing
technical direction, co-ordination and training to other technical
staff , including instructing and technical training programmes . "
I
I'
35
ws� .were asked to find that the Environmental Technician a
class standard dealt with persons who carried out one e:f three
separate functions , whereas the Environmental Technician 4 class
standard included employees who had responsibilities in "a ranar of
several areas . " It was submitted that' Mr. Perkons functioned as a
group leader providing technical direction , that he ran the fiF• 1
operations in relation to special studies , obtained staff ,
necessary equipment , arranged logistics and ensured that thr,�=-N
involved were aware of their. responsibilities . He was reEponsi.hl-
for training students , L . I .C. program and regular staff who wer--
involved in projects and special studies .
After hearing very full evidence concerning the duties and
. responsibilities of Mr . Perkons , both from himself and hr . Irwin ,
we are satisfied that while they each gave their evidence honest !,: .
the actual duties and responsibilities of Mr. Perkons were somc:�h
more general and less complex than those he described , but they:
were more complex and technical than those described by Mr. Irwin .
The truth lav somewhere in between. The position specification f:�,r
Mr. Perkons that existed prior to his reclassification ( Exhibit 4 )
dated in 1976 , and which is annexed as Appendix 2 , and the one set
out in Exhibit 9 present two different views of his duties an-1
responsibilities . We find that the evidence that we heard was r.:f:
the greatest value in allowing us to assess the key elements that
are relevant to :Mr . Perkons ' proper classification .
i.
It was submitted on behalf of the Employer that the duties and
responsibilities of the Grievor with respect to the water quality
monitoring network, which took up approximately 50 per cent of his
time, only involved a routine, simple exercise where someone else
had established the sample points as well as the criteria and
parameters of what would be tested. for with the analysis of the
samples abeing conducted at the lab in -Toronto . The work was
described as involving going into the field to pick up the sampies
and preparing them for shipment to the laboratory. The level of
data analysis was said to be limited to examining Sheets of figures ,
and noting major deviations. When a major deviation was noted, Mr .
Perkons called the laboratory in order to obtain an explanation.
This was said to represent simple, repetitive and routine work.
Mr . Perkons ' responsibility for dealing with watr- t•.
interference complaints was said to involve minimal. expertise an<l
it was acknowledged that anyone in the branch could, and did , on
occasion, perform this function. Counsel for the Employer noted
that there was no evidence of any complex water interference
problem that had been dealt with by Mr. Perkons . The evidence
disclosed that after an investigation a short memorandum, usually .
about a page long , was placed in a file.
we were asked to find that Mr. Perkons was a relatively minor
plaver in the work involved in the waste water assimilation studies
and that the directing mind behind these studies (as well as all
i
37
other :;tudiesf was the Hydrologist and , in his absence, Mr . Irwin .
ft wa:; the Hydrologists who decided on the formulaticin and
structure of the plan and Mr. Perkons merely carried out certain
relatively uncomplicated technical functions . Counsel for rh
Employer did concede that the Grievor made decisions as to how his
work would be carried out but took the position that the carryinci
out of the projects did not require any special technical
sophist.ication.
Aithough counsel for the Employer argued than zr,�.
Environmental Technician class standard ought not to be vi,;:.-.-d
involving three discrete positions , when the class standard is ;:-�a d
in the light of the Environmental Technician 4 class standard , r.h-
words after the word OR indicate that it , unlik. th._
Envirormental Technician 3 class standard, envisage Lncumhen.—r.
perforrTting "ar_rc5s a range of several areas in the r_nvLr�nr�r ;ir..;ti
and pollution control field . "
Although neither the Environmental Technician 3 nor r. h,,
Environmental Technician 4 class standard represent a perfect fit.
i
in relation to Mr. Perkons ' duties and responsibilities , -there arn
many areas under the knowledge , judgement , accountability an,3
rcantacts components of both class standards which could appl`- ro
him. Because he clearly functioned "across a range of s+ve—ral
areas in the environmental and pollution control field , " r?ferri-d
to in the Environmental Technician 4 class standard and not within
38
only one' of the discrete positions referred to in the Environmental
Technician 3 class standard, his best fit is within the
Environmental Technician 4 class standard. Although counsel for
the Employer asked us to find that the duties and responsibilities
carried out by Mr. Perkons were of very limited technical
complexity, we are satisfied that they fell within the statement
"advanced responsibilities, " although not at the higher end of the
scale of responsibility .
Unlike the facts in the McColl case (at P . 4 ) , where it was
found that there were no facts. to take the case "out of the gen.aral
. rule that retrocactivity only goes back to 20 days before the date
the grievance was filed, here, Exhibit 5 put the Employer on notice
that Mr. Perkons was giving them an opportunity to resolve his
classification dispute amicably without the necessity of filing a
grievance. in the circumstances , he had reason to believe that the
Employer had not rejected his request but was giving it ongoing
consideration • so as to excuse his delaying the filing of a
grievance until July of 1987 .
Decision with respect to the period October 2 1985 to September 3q-
19 86 .
• Accordingly , we find that Mr. Perkons was improperly
classified as an Environmental Technician 3 between October 2 , 1985
and September 30 , 1986 , and that he is entitled to be paid the
'y
J
difference between the pay scales of that classification and t.hai.
i of Environmental Technician 4 , together with payment of interest
calculated on the basis of the formula set out by the Ontario
Labour Relations Board in Hal owel House Limited, 119801 O . L .R . B .
Rep. Jan . 35 . Payment of compensation and interest will he
retroactive to October 2, 1985 . We retain jurisdiction to deal with
any difficulty the parties may experience in arriving at the amount
payable to Mr . Perkons . -
The�alt?rnative -claim of the Grievor
We will now consider the claim of the Grievor for
reclassification as an EO4 during the period October 1 , 1986 , when
it was agreed that we were to regard the Environmental officer
class series as having replaced the Environmental Technic L.,n c i.,ss
series , to the date of the retroactive reclassification cf th(-
, Grievor as an EO4 effective September 1 , 1987 . - Although the
reclassification of the Grievor as an Environmental Officer 4 was
initially shown to have an effective date of September 1 , 1987 , It
was acknowledged that, by a later decision, he was paid at the
Environmental Officer 3 class standard rate from October 1 , 1986 to
August 31 , 1987 , and it was the alternative position of the UnLon
that fo- the latter period , he was entitled to be reclassifed and
paid at the Environmental Officer 4 . '
i
I
In " McColl , at p. ? , reference was made to Zakrewski , 9();'88
( Samuels ) , "wherein the panel grappled with interpreting the new
environmental officer standards and laid' down guidelines for
distinguishing between a proper E03 and E04 classification of an
individual , which class standards are appended to this award as
Apendices 3 and 4 . At p. 3 of Powers/Smith/Hodains/1 1523/87 etc .
( Samuels ) , the majority of the Board further considered the same
question. At p. 3 . of Powers et al . , the majoirity of th, Board
stated :
This moves us to the central issue - is the E04 class standard
appropriate for the grievors ' positions?
. . . It is necessary to consider both [of the E03 and E04 class
standards ] because the E04 standard incorporates the iower
level . In the opening paragraph of the EO 4 standard , we read
that this classification covers employees -who exercise the
responsibilities of an E03 , and, in addition , have advanced
responsibilities .
The majority of the Board in Zakrewski , which stated at
15 .
. . . The critical difference between the [ EO1 3 and 4 is the
generalist nature of the 3 's job, and the "technically complex
and specialized" nature of the 4 ' s work.
in Powers et al . , at page 3, the majority of the Board added:
The Union argued that, in order to move to E04 , an employee
.must do all of the E03 functions, and , in addition have
advanced responsibilities . If this were not the case, i-t is
quite likely that one would be unable to find any employees
who fit the E04 standard. Show us the employee who
. investiges ;
selects , operates and maintains specialized equipment ;
. provides assistance to other Ministry staff in
conducting applied research projects ; and
bears advance responsibilities
I
i
and ' we will show you a superhero , a creature of
proportions. The E04 standard is' not the stuff of fairy talf,s ,
but was written to cover real employees .
( emphasis in original )
It is significant that the ET4 class standard differs Er:�m
that of the E04 in that it does not contemplate that a persf,n
classified will carry out all of the functions of the next 1!7:wr_'r
classification within the same series : "incorporates the lower
level . " Given that the E03 and 4 class series add addit .on. ,, l
, responsibilities to those in the ET3 and ET4 series, we find that
an ET4 , which was yr . Perkons ' appropriate classification
October " 1985 and September 30 , 1986 , did not have t,) t-,e
"superhero" envisaged by the majority of the Board in Powers ?t_,il ..
Nor do we find that he had the "technically ccmplex an.]
specialized" responsibilities , referred to in Zakrw_sAA ,
that would support our ho Iding that: his appropriate lass: f ,- 1.,::r,
from October 1 , 1986 to September 1 , 1987 was other than as an Eo_' .
We have no doubt that Mr. Perkons was a very capable emrl�vet:
who could have assumed more responsibility at the relevant times .
However, as the majority of the Board stated in Zakrgwskl, at pacle
14 :
. . . Generally, this Board has made it clear that it is the job
wh:Lch is classified , not the incumbent . An incumbent m,-,v b
over-qualified for the job, but this does not make n,:
difference to the classification. But in this vase the a»neral
rule does not work. This is a job with a very flexible t:-,p
end. The- environmental officer, is called on to deal with
contamination.
After a careful analysis of the evidence, we conclude that although
42
neither - the E03 or the E04 class standard represents the kind of
fit referred to in Powers, at page. five: "like an expensive gR,)ve, "
the E03 class standard represents the best fit. The facts did not
satisfv us that Mr. Perkons, was required, at the relevant time, to
function other than as a "generalist" although a very proficient
one. His duties , as described in the evidence , while involving a
number of technical aspects , did not reach the level of technical
complexity and specialization that differentiate the E03 from the
E04 . That the divide was crossed some time around September 1 ,
1987 , is clear from the fact of Mr . Perkons ' ultimata
reclassification to an E04 and then to an E05 .
Decision on the glassification of the Grievor_between October
1986 and Au,us0 1987
ror the above reasons , this aspect of the grievance is dismissed .
Dated at Toronto this 18day of December , 1992 .
M. Gorsky - Vice Chairperson
"I Partially Dissent'! (attached)
1
G. Majesky - , Member
-O'Toole - Mo-mbe t
I
'Between
OPSEU (PERKONS)
FILE NIIMBFR 2011187
and
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(MbtWq of Fnviromnent)
UNION NOMINEE PARTLIL DISSENT
As the union nominee in this matter, I have read the award of the
board, and respectfully disassociate myself from the views of the majority
in respect to the finding of when Mr. Perkons commenced his functions
as an EO-4.
The Board properly found that Mr. Perkons performed the functions
of a ET-4 from October 2, 1985 until September 30, 1986 -contrary to
the employer's position that the grievor was a ET-3. In addition, I believe
the evidence supports a finding that Mr. Perkons was properly a EO-4 on
October 1 , 1986 - contrary to the board's finding that "the divide was
crossed some time around September 1 ,, 1987".
As a result of Zakrewski, it is now significantly more difficult to
determine when a threshold has been crossed in the EO Class Standard,
because the "continuum principle" enunciated in Zakrewski contemplates
piercing the class standard ceiling of the: next higher position under the
guise of "top end flexibility". Consequently, grievors can make forays
into a higher classification, but win no cigar.
Thus, although finding as a question of fact, that the grievor falls
within the EO-3 standard from October 1 , 1986 to September 1 , 1987,
the majority proceeded on a basis which is entirely too cautious, and not
in keeping with the evidence. I Prn !rindful of the majority's decision in
which the majority states that "neither the EO-3 or the EO-4 class
standard represents the kind of fit referred to in Powers, at page five: 'like
an expensive glove,' [though] the E03 class standard represents the best
n
f it".
However, while the EO-3 may in a general sense describe Mr.
Perkons duties from October 1 , 1986 to September 1 , 1987, quite clearly
the EO-4 standard is a better, fuller and more accurate description. The
fact that the grievor is currently at the EO-5 level, also suggests that his
level of skill and proficiency within EO class standard is a result of
performing technically complex and specialized responsibilities as an EO-
4 well before the October 1 , 1987 date when the board found Mr.
Perkons crossed the divide from EO-3 to EO-4. For these reasons, I
would have awarded the relief requested in the alternative claim of the'
grievor.
Respectfully submitted by,
FP RN CONSULTANT SERVICES
Gary
Unio i e
GM/mg
MARKHAM, Ontario
November 1992
Ppendix
f Positlon Speclticb.. :. Glass Allocatiull-GSC 61s
tRster 10 DaCK Of form for ComD101!on ns?cC^G^s]
,.yin�i~�3in0! i r .]a:•'ecar•d � p'♦r•e�r t«,a,�•mw. '�rh i�•a . '-
ior CSC
MN only
1, aulo ,n. o+na�oco• ra•ion',.i^^,.7..—i:: :
Senior Environmental Officer (Surface water, 37-1.407-33 l 1
Seh —I 'leyr iq o T Coln amyl C•atl Ion S••are wen r•.m�r rev�.'a• M rap..aM•I Coaelll ^� C-,O-
36-1/4 A + ..C �r i C: s.--• C a•' I i
po-- .UII• I eef eon C:0 �'w,qua arw cod. ,
i5,roa•eaea New Position
Mn.eny
D-1.on —-
Environment Operations
raven and •ahem 'Locandn .
:•- , .•c •_cue
crest Central Region, Tech. Support ) 119 King St. W, Hamilton 5d602�
o.
of 044 rc••9e+nrrup Ifeearm.n to S,Uen HO't Coy t d^ - ^
No of No of".8""2 - - Chief. dater Res. Assessment! 37-44'3 -30
I•P rpaae of I an IVrn,d1. hil o+non• u„
' o propvq��e the Aeg�on with a senior level of technical expertise and so-
technical advice and recommendations to deal with a wide variety of
environmental problems relating to surface water quality and qua.-."..1--y
management.
7.dirties en I 1 Is 'ow nrl t • 1.I! y'!+
I 4�' 'ee4 ' 3n�.'K 1"°s'i3�SeYvY 'ion►, ��'�il. art} i � °' imp Fri)-ri &!d report •.
N% surface water :management activities including complex studies oE+�c-:
source impacts, urban and rural drainage and landfills and spe=_al
water quality and quantity :monitoring studies by per_ormsng scc: �!..t-es
as:
reviewing background informati,)n including water qur'- ;,fly and yuar.t_ty
and resource use information;
_> - participating in the establishment of terms of reference fcr s:;udies
including complex and unprecedented studies;
- recommending casual staff requirements and equipment needs:
- establishing the number and location of sair,pling and mcn__or-ng ;tints
relative to specific survey goals and the frequency of sampling:
r - installing, operating and calibrating monitoring devices:
conducting or co-ordinating the collection of water, sediment, fis, and
invertebrates and/or plant and other monitoring data:
- making on-the-spot field measurements of .relevant parameters
(le. temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity) . making sketches
and takinq pictures;
- taking accurate field notes (e.g. time, location, staff involved,
persons talked to, condition of stream and other observati-ns) for
: future reference (e.g. witness statements) ;
. . . Ccnt'd
I
4.SM�I11 and knowlulpe required to perform lots at full wonting loyal. it Kaea n,r.n•to• -we^!an a. •ee�en !aptlnc n•el .
I Many years experience in the environmental field with extensive Knowledge o:
the theory, principles and practices of surface water survey and assess=ment
techntefiies and the environmental impact of contaminants. Th sk4 lls and
cont'd
IS.S�ynetY I r.ygr Oar, Mlmurr ONl r / ,-' -r.e
+II DIV 4omn rqr Day Mon,n
Y upMy.•p'1 many Type 01ficilitIrnspVto !Ile
S. M. Iruln 5. I/ yko, Regional Direc-,or
6.Cfaaa elloutlon Craw I4,a elaw coon OQwarwnu era,fP nurnder QI'eet.e..A,1.
Coy Month °ear
Environmental Officer 4 61506 TS-07 i 01 09 1 37
I her•cla"'hed+n.1.Poa,Iron M accoraanee tr,lh the C—1 San.ce Can,a+iw-on Cless.f-catron Standards lar ins follamni;rZw.
a,Cnder minimal supervision exercises advanced responsibilities such as planr.i.^.g, er;aa:z:r.q,
implementing and reporting on surface water management problems.
s,uork requires technical expertise, flexibility and depth co perform such duties as preparizR
1 comprehensive technical reports on complex issues including recommendations where arpra9rl'1ta
for abatement anal/or enforceaent action.
C.Acccur.rable for independent compietion of complex work such as participating in the
establishment of items of reference for studies includiig complex and ur.preceder.ted
srudies.
n GJ eutnorlaa(r 0"'.8to, 00.6 •ype e.,e,uetor r nary
\ Day month year
!e in Mac!ntvre.Hum'—
Duties and related tasks ' =nt ' d)
IPA 9
--74- e-h.suring proper samp.Ling techniques , chain of pi* ession of samples and
m6kinq correct submissions of water samples to the laboratory for
analysis ;
ensuring proper adherence to safety requirements for sampling and
handling samples;
undertaking comprehensive technical evaluations of data and drawing
appropriate conclusions concerning cause and effect relationships in
complex and unprecedented situations ;
identifying aquatic life forms to permit the categorization of varying
water quality;
�_� -- managing and manipulating data by electronic means including
computerized modelling and other assessment techniques ;
? - applying and interpreting appropriate legislation, policies or
guidelines in the evaluation of complex problems ;
- � - preparing comprehensive technical reports on complex issues including
recommendations where appropriate for abatement and/or enforcement
action;
- maintaining and updating files to ensure that current records are
available.
2 . Under minimal supervision, undertake assessments of complaints and
20% contingencies ( fish kills , spills, algal blooms, taste and odour
complaints and stream interference investigations) including preparing
reports on findings with conclusions and recommendations by performing
duties similar to #1 above in an impromptu fashion.
3 . Review and comment on the more complex approval documents such as
15% applications for approval of sewage, waterworks and landfill
.proposals, permit applications such as permits for water taking, quasi
approval documents such as approvals for marine, road and pipeline
construction including dredge and fill and land use plan review
proposals relating to surface water management activities by performing
such duties as:
- reviewing data (background, consultant reports , applications and
supporting information) and assessing the technical completeness of the
submission;
evaluating the environmental significance of the proposal on surface
water, quality or quantity;
evaluating compliance with legislation, policy or guidelines ;
conducting field investigations where necessary to determine the
environmental implications of the project;
- developing field monitoring programs where necessary;
preparing recommendations on the acceptability of the project as it
relates to the protection of surface water quality or quantity
including recommending effluent criteria for the Certificate of
Approval where appropriate;
supporting interpretations and recommendations in negotiations with the
proponents .
4 . In concert with the supervisor, organize and/or administer special
15% projects such as Remedial Action Plan activities , APIOS activities ,
SCOUR (Students Cleaning Our Urban Rivers), projects , Section 38 and
monitoring/assessment contract projects by performing such duties as:
- meeting with organizations such as consultants, Conservation
Authorities and the Ministry of Natural Resources to establish terms of
reference and scope of the project;
- preparing contracts and requests for -proposal for studies ;
- selecting and technically supervising non-permanent staff, including
hiring commercial diving teams for work in hazardous environments ;
- maintaining administrative and financial records on the projects .
- ---- --
5 . .,Support t1he enforcement function by issuing offense notices under
5y' Fart I of the Provi Offenses Act, preparing rrence reports for
action by IES, reccmme,Lding other legal actions as Controi Orders
and participating and representing the 'Ministry at public and legiil
proceedings such as hearings, court cases , Ontario Municipal Board
hearings, public meetings and Council meetings .
b . Perform related surface water management activities such as :
10%
- selecting non-permanent staff ;
- providing technical guidance to staff; ,
evaluating and making recommendations for the purchase of telemetry and
other monitoring and sampling equip«ent;
- maintaining field equipment and required administrative documentation
such as inventory lists ;
-- liaising with the public, municipal officials , industrial and other
client grcups , the news media and government agencies to provide
informatics on a wide variety of surface water management activities ;
irimediately advising the supervisor of -potentially contentious issues :
- preparing Status Reports and other administrative documents as
required;
keeping abreast of technical developments in the area of technical
expertise .
7 . Perform other duties as assigned such as:
5%
- may be required to participate as an Emergency Response Person;
- may be required to assist at contingency sites after regular working
hours .
Skills and Knowledge (cons' d)
knowledge noted in the compensable factors sectic.n, are also required. A
valid driver ' s license and the ability to perform independently field
is required.
i
_CnMPENSAHLE FACTORS 31-44U7-33
y CWLEUGE
Work requires the technical expertise, flexibility and depth of background
to deal independently with a wide variety of unpredictable environmental
problems relating to surface water evaluation and assessment where the
individual ' s knowledge may be the only immediate guide to action. This
would include :
- an extensive knowledge of physical , biological and chemical- processes
occurring in surface waters ;
- an extensive knowledge of the impacts of point and diffuse waste
sources on surface waters;
- an extensive knowledge of assessment techniques for determining the
environmental impact of point and diffuse waste sources on surface
waters;
- a working knowledge of quality assurance/quality-control practices and
procedures and Occupational Health and Safety Act requirements for
sampling and handling hazardous contaminants ;
- an extensive knowledge of environmental legislation and policy such as
OWRA, EPA and Manual of Environmental Policies and Guidelines Related
to Surface Water Quality and Quantity Management;
- an extensive knowledge of the Provincial Offenses Act;
- a working knowledge of related legislation such as the Pesticides Act,
the Environmental Assessment Act. the Lakes and Streams Improvement Act
and applicable Ministry and government policies , guidelines , procedures
and programs ;
- a working knowledge of industrial and municipal environmental control ,
Pollution abatement and land use planning practices;
- demonstrated leadership and communications skills including good
organizational skills;
- mature judgement, tact and the ability to deal with people;
- a working knowledge of court procedures ;
- a working knowledge of micro/mini computers and associated sof*wa.-o and
their practical application.
Judgement
Work is performed under minimal supervision. Judgement is employed to
co-ordinate the necessary human, material and/or .information resources and
to organize studies , surveys , investigations of complaitns or inspections
independently, referring to supervisors only in the event of unusual
circumstances and to advise on progress . Judgement is exercised in applying
general technical principles to new problems which do not respond to -
precedent or established practice and when representing the Ministry at
public meetings, hearings , court appearances or in dealings with the media.
Judgement is also required to select and modify surveying and sampling
methodologies as required based on unique field circumstances , in
interpreting information and data, in preparing comprehensive technical
reports on complex issues and in formulating recommendations for abatement
adn/or enforcement action.
Judgement skills are required in interpreting regulations , legislation,
policies and procedures and practices and in exercising tact to handle
contentious and high profile issues . Persuasiveness and mature judgement
are required especially when dealing with complaints , the media and elected
officials .
Judgement is required in making technical assessments of the impact of
spills and recommended remedial measures.
i
i
nt is required in .—viewing and commencing on coltants and other
_cal reports .
uc?gemont is -equired in the issuance of Offense Notices under the
Provincial CffEnses Act .
— --
Accountability
These positions are fully accountable for the independent completion of
complex work, for the technical accuracy and quality of data collected or
produced and for comprehensive technical reports with recommendations as a
result of their decision on necessary information including format and
content of reports and appropriateness of recommendations . Reports are
suitable for distribution outside the Ministry after only general review by
the supervisor. Errors could result in inappropriate action, unnecessary
expense and potential environmental damage, public health hazards and
embarrassment to the Ministry.
Contacts
Work involves a wide variety of continuing contacts with governmental and
industrial officials (operations , technical ,, professional and management
levels) , elected officials , general public , the media, consultants ,
developers , contractors , health officials, officials of the Ministry
(technical , scientific and engineering) , other Provincial Ministries , the
Government of Canada and international agencies .
The contacts are for the purpose of exchanging information, giving advice .
publishing interpretive data, making recommendations , planning co-operative
studies or enforcing regulations . It may be necessary to give testimo^y
before pt;bl-c hearings or in a court of law, make presentations at public
meetings or represent the Ministry on Citizen ' s Liaison Ccrmittees .
In all contacts the employee officially represents the Ministry .
I
I
Appendix 2
.-�. FOSiTrON SM... 4ATION AND cuss ALMUNN W9
USE UNLY*+1141 CL15ili1CATm 0109WAAS MAO[UNOit1 AG;r%tMJW 11TWIX
A DIFVTV 111MLiTIA A O THE CrW AWN OF Tk1 C11fri 30it I COMMIS"".
1
37-0344'7:34'-,
PART t 8,06MON TITLt T us tog ncu M
WATER RESOURCES TECRNI W RYSED
.PREVIOUS 0631TION?iTL[ Ci06UTaLi 96^"coat 0CWTIONCOOs
TECHNICIAN BIOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL TECH 3 61404 37-0344-34
CHIEF, RJATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 37-0344-30
YMItT+Y
OF THE ENVIRONMENT gECICNAL OPERATION$
WEST-CENTRAL oP I MYNIS"fRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT !
- -- wentnrnrit eis>er.L o..1rs
Mao r�eu�+aa�rs *asmvu! sv►eRVtrsa INCU+AlE►fTi Su►l�esio ONTARM="V MS"SWLDNI
OU1EL"1LY �INOIIIEL't1.Y DtAEttt y �1l10fl1A�Y �1t:tM!STliCi?�ffT,tip R"t
3 bel sit Nw1L"N'altlan LA m
2.PURPOSE0 FPOSIT10N(mvnim7uusPmre* r,ilesera". .
To assi,t in the assessment (quality and quantity) , the allocation (by
permit and resolution of interference) and the regulation (by interference
settlements and overseeing the water well industry) of the water resources
of the West Central Region. .
8•SUMMARY OF DUTIES ANO RESPO14S181UT1ES{imirAT;r*mccnTAci os(Duff SPWTeN ud wGmi:fCAHT FUNOTMiL
MOCAT!SCM.COUI WENT.WORMINCCONCH-RW tWtUSUAL P"TURMiTC.t -
'Assists in asocssing water quality and quantity in the west Central Region
by establishing sampling points; choosing appropriate survey techniques,-
evaluating data.
Assists. in allocating water use priveleges in the West Central Region by
reVfewang, Froeessfng and making recommendation for the issuance of Water
Taking Permits and by investigating unresolved water use, interference com-
plaints and recommending compensation or sharing programs to resolve tha
complaint.
Assists in regulating the development of water resources in the West Central
Region by investigating water takings under permit and where necessary
reco=en+itng takings be subject to -The Ontario Water Resources Act; and by . .
enforcing regulations related to the grater well industry. .
• r t f • . ,
a cull 1 e eUn IMIVIL50GE REOUIREO TO PERFORM THE WORK w rATI1O=T=-'rPAUrNQ-ExPfl"WSIM
wore re quires that incumbent have a xnowieage or vit: -L,,dvjY duu �t1Llt:l�1CS
-of water _esoui:ces asses- -ent. Education should in,-tude graduation from a -
co=uni,6.y college or equivalent in an environmental science related course,
continued. . . .
S.SIGNANSES
Y�M�OfAY«irCrY l OAK 9` LMT 0►T"[04 F. f 1
(.1�w ryf.W�rYIW`.AM+I
C. A. Pearce C. J. efar ant. Director
S.CLASS ALLOCATION
�.. r. . •:-_• - S y " G*411! �� ► lY!past
LlAls TITi! r: n y. - ' .. i � '. .i.::.•�•"e.?�' ^ �'.. � :�. �/. �.� ,iti�t +e�! '-'�1�ilr y ��r.+i��]�.� r�
Envirotsmental 'tec�tltici 3;
CLAS.1$190 10419 P021 TUN UN4ER AUT ovgTV attIrATiO TO ME SY THE DNuTY WtktWM AND IM ACOOIIO ct ?"go" aRVMS 00*KUIS"
CLASS�f+t�7�pMSTANDARDS SCR T•i MLLOW1146 PLUZOW
A. Inctnbenc invescigaces castes' quality problems collecting a evalt=ating data upon which
be bssco raceamendations for remedial action.
RASSists proEtssionals in devetopi" surveillance programs to monitor potential basCrds to
vatcr quality.
CRgVicWs .Water use applications, making recommend*tiors for sceepeanca or rejection.
430�vpffib No v mom"*
:""" �• �' d •71 RUS
Junk a P Chief personnel Officer
...__ ;
JAN 13 ' 92 97 1 Tf63334796 ~PAGE . 00 1
� I
n i
r• r r
..SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE REQUIRED TO PERFORMS THE WORK '(continued)
such as aquatic biology, water chemistry, hydrology, hydregcology. skill
is required in the installation of instruments and equipment and in the
mathemati al analysis and interpratation of data to simulate and project
environmental effects. It is necessary to recognize, understand, evaluate
and analyse risks and potential environmental problems arising from a
situation. Skill is required in reporting 'findings in a' meaningful and
clear fashion. Incumbent must be capable of developing field surveillance
programs and preparing and justifying the necessary supporting budget for
such programs. Tact and communicationrability is required. when approaching
and soliciting required informatinn• from citizens, contractors, civio
officials "and others_ Incumbent must 'passess the ability to mediate between
disagreeing parties without taking--sides during field investigations and
follow,-up analysis and reporting. A kndwledge of water related actions and
reactions likely to impact the environment tag, farm: practices, contraction
techniques) boat and water safety and a mechanical aptitude are beneficial,
oJUDGEMENT
Judge"ent i.s required to decide what data is reliable and applicable and to
assess the magnitude of a problem, deterzai.ne the impact on the public well
being and the need for legal action to resolve :a problem. Procedures
manuals, regulations under the C.W.R. Act, previous reports and published
guidelines and criteria are available for the use of the incumbent. The
incumbent must determine and inform the public of its rights related to
. water supply and risks of interference with others if specific actions are
taken.
ACCOUNTABILITY
The incumbent must account for the quality of data utilized by the Ministry
in: justifying the development of physical facilities such as sewage
treatment plants assessing responsibility to a party for financial reimburse
ment to an individual who is the victim of a water interference situakioni
persuing a prosecution related to accidental or intentional degradation of
a watercoursa or aquif ar, "
' Errors or omissions by the incumbent can result in expenditures of extra
money (where re-investigation is necessary or where unnecessary facilities
are developed) , embarrassment to the Ministry and- loss of prosecution or
litigation.
The incumbent reports to the Chief, Water Resources Assessment and on
occasion heads crews (usually summer students) undertaking field surveys.
Incumbent is responsible for operation and Maintenane2 of equipment such as
CONTACTS '
Work requires regular contact with other technicians and professional staff
in own region and other regions, head office specialists, industrial and
municipal representatives, general public, conservation authorities and
other agencies. Information is exchanged and technical problems discussed
in an effort to resolve outstanding problems.
INCUMBENTS
A. achuk
QOJCI
I. G. Parkons
e
Th discussed job specification has been road by and uss d with the incumbent.
i
JAN 13 '9? 3: 16 4163334736 PAGE. 092 •
f
i
Cho CUSS STANDARDS APPENDIX 3 , pace 1
OMWO
r
3
Category Group
TLCHRICAL SERVICES TS-07 RESOURCES SUPPOET
Series ENVIROIFI MAL OFTICER Casa Cade
E MIORKEr L OM= 3
This class covers positions involving inspection, investigations. and
enforcement activities in the environmental assessment and pollution control
field. In sow positions they would conduct investigations to ..identify,
monitor and report an sources of pollution of air, land, or water, including
I noise, and plan, organize and conduct assessment surveys and monitoring of the
natural environment. With respect to pollution control occurrences, they could
also effect corrective action by making recommendations for implementation of
appropriate abatement measures, and initiate where necessary appropriate _
enforcement activity to ensure compliance with environmental legislation. They
may also be responsible for providing emergency response to spill contingency
situations and plant process upsets, to monitor and provide recommendations
and/or remedial measures. They may review and process applications and prepare
Certificates of Approval.
This class also covers positions which are responsible for the selection,
operation and maintenance of specialized, complex, electronic, chemical or
mechanical air, water or wastewater monitoring equipment in field locations
resulting in the production of validated data for use in environmental
assessment programs. They may also provide assistance to other ministry staff
in conducting applied research projects or surveys to evaluate new technology,
methods, and assess the natural environment. The compensable factors at this
1'eve1 are typically reflected as follows:
I. Knov
A working knowledge of the principles and practices of industrial and
municipal environmental control, pollution abatement, land use and
contingency response practices. Positions may involve knowledge of:
industrial processes/municipal water supply systems/sewage disposal
systems/agricultural activities/Waste management/ground and surface
water technology/environmental monitoring equipment/court procedures
regarding enforcement activities. Knowledge of environmental and related
lagislation, regulations,- ministry. pal icies, practices and administrative
procedures is also required. Good oral and written communicative skills
and tact are mandatory.
2. Judgement:
Worst is performed under general supervision with some independence in
the planning and execution of field inspections and surveys, complaint
investigations and enforcement activity. Judgement is also exercised in
the preparation of comprehensive technical reports, interpretation of
information and data, the development of remedial recommendations and
when representing the ministry at public and municipal meetings, and
before the courts and other quasi judicial bodies.
Eflecrtre Date Issued page
y
APPENDIX 3 , pare 2
i
Cho CLASS STAWf3A pce
s.r.as
Coewimrra+
4rse .
Gerory Cuouo
TEMICAI. 321VICU T3-07 MOM= silppox?
Swans sniz oMII AL o"im Class Code
tsvi rsemsotal Of f itor 3 Cart*d. `
In some positions judgement is exercised vheas evaluating complaints/-
calibrating and servicing instruments and equipment/sasuring appropriate
cleanup action at spills/initiating and/or recommending appropriate
legal action and snforcement act.ivit7 where infractions of legislation
have bets discovered. p*rsuasivepsss and mature judgement are required
especially when dealing with complainants. the media, and elected
officials on contentious issues.
3. Accountsbility:
The incumbent is directly aecouncable for: collecting complete and
accurate technical information/interpreting end utilizing informstion
gathered to implement correct ive� proaedures/init Lac ing enforcement
activtt7/msintsinLot and operating complex equipment is accordance with ~
legialatioa or established niaistry practice and preeedests.
Inappropriate recommendations could result to *owe monetary loss to the
ministry or others and in loss of the ministry's credibilit7 and
prestiss.
4. Contacts: rri
e
Regular contact is made with the public, Industrial clients, the media,
sunicipal officials, consultants. developers, contractors, health
officials, emergency responso personnel, other provincial and Federal
agencies and elected officials. Contacts are for the purposes of
exchanging information, giving technical advice, making recommendations,
t:spondint to contingencies, developing orders, and **forcing provincial 7"
legislation. The incumbent officially represents the ministry in all illo"
contacts and may be required to appear as a ministry ritsass at htarings
and In courts of law and to provide inforswtion at public settings.
,x,
CAN CLASS STANOAAr APPENDIX 4 , cage 1
s.r.+ea
Ca�rKa�er►
Oettai�o
Category Gfoug
TECHNICAL SERVICES RESOURCZS SUPPORT
Series Class Code
ENVIRONMENTAL 4PPICER
1
X11 IONNOlAL OTTIC32 •
This class covers positions of employees who, in addition to the
responsibilities described in the Environmental Officer 3 standard, exercise
advanced responsibilities across a range of several .areas in the environmental
and pollution control field.
They may function as group leaders providing technical direction,
co—ordinating and reviewing the staff activities, assigning and evaluating
technical work, and instructing in technical training programs. Also, in _a
group leader role, they may participate as a technical advisor on selection
boards and in the performance management process by performing.such duties as
advising on training. and certification courses and work objectives, and may be
responsible for recommending the purchase of specialized monitoring equipment
and the selection of appropriate sites; 01 they may be recognised senior
environmental officers who have the ability and wide variety of experience to
function independently and to assume significant responsibility. They will
exercise judgement and initiative to identify and resolve complex and
contentious problems; OR in the advanced investigation and enforcement
function they may perform at an entry level in which they gain training and
experience in both fields. The compensable factors at this level are typically
reflected as follows: r
1. Knowledexes_
Voris requires the technical expertise, flexibility and depth of l
background to deal independently with a wide variety of unpredictable
environmental problems, where the individual's knowledge may be the only
mediate guide to action. Demonstrated leadership, communication skills
and a good knowledge of a wide variety of environmental and related
legislation and regulations are essential. In some positions which deal
with instrumentation a proven technical proficiency is required.
2. Jud eg meat:
Work is performed under minimal supervision. Judgement is employed to
ca—ordinate the necessary human, material and/or information resources
and to organise studies, surveys, investigations of complaints or
inspections independently, referring to supervisors only in event of
very unusual circumstances, and to advise on progress.
Judgement is exercised in applying general technical principles to new
problems which do not respond to precedent or established practice and
when representing the ministry at public meetings, hearings or in
dealings with media. In some positions judgement is also required when:
J recommending appropriate clean-up action at spills/considering
recommendations for legal action/interpreting legislation/reviewing
` reports and recommendations of other technical staff.
1 I
Effective Date lasuetf 1page
APPENDIX 4 , oaae 2
c1.0 CLASS STANDAAD
s.�.
Category Group
TECWNI= SERVICES TS- 07 "SOUM SUPPORT
So"" Ctaas Code
MV110NlUMAL 0MCZ1
znvirpowntal Officer • Costa.
3. Accountability:
These positions are fully accountable for independent completion of
complex writ, for the technical guidance and coordination of actions of
ocher assigned staff, for the technical accuracy and. quality of data
collected or produced and for comprehensive technical reports with
recommendations as a result of their decision an necessary information,
for foveae and content of reports ;arid appropriateness of recosmend-
aticss; and in some positions for the purchase, installation and
Maintenance of Complex monitoring equipment. Reports are suitable for
distribution outside the ministry after only general review by the
supervisor. Inappropriate recommendations could result in sole monetary
loss to the ministry or others and in loss of the ministry's credibility
and prestige.
�- contactst
Mork involves a ride variety of continuing contacts 'vitb governmental
and industrial officials at the operational, technical,professional and
management levels, elected officials, general public, the media, '
consultants, developers, contractors, hosith officials, technical,
scientific and engineering officials of the ministry, other provincial
ministries, the Government of Canada and international agencies.
.The contacts are for the purpose of exchanging Information, giving
advice, publishing interpretative data, staking recomaenda=ions, plannieg
co-operative studies, or enforcing -regulations. They any be called to
give evidence an technical matters or to appear as an expert vitu*ss
before administrative tribunals such as the Environmental Assessment
Board or a court of lay. They may be required to make presentations at
public meetings or represent the ministry on citizens, liaison
committees. In all contacts, the employee officially represents the ;
ministry.
w
i
3
r
EttemlVe Date Mued Pape
old CAANVANCARDS
swro. APPENDIX 5 , oaa.e 1
CMOWY
sun= rs-07 EM= WMV
use ,
ds�w
S
�� �ri ?Ai. C�ICZt pass C.o4!
61509
genets s
This glass aovors positions of aMployees vho, acting at a senior level as
program implementation co-erdinators, have direct-responsibtlity for
es-ordinsrtsg LM activities of brsa-b ampler rssfoaal pfrsoanoi as Chet' relate
to the appropriate program area OR act as designated specialists for branches or
regions (bath programs implamenestion co-ordinators and designated specialists
fansties in a specialty arse Within MMieipal ar industrial gelid wssta/liqaid
vasts/esission Control/eomplas assessment surveys) = act as officers in cbe
invescigatioa and enforcement function *be Must make deeistarss issdepeadsatly,
using only their knowledge, skills and exparienos as guides in such ratters as
collecting and analysint evidence such as financial records/eosspany books/
waybills, Sather%as intelligence on *tolatars and preparing and-sssiseing
sainiscry lawyers with prosacucions. ?be Corpensable factors at t413 level are
CYPICaliy reflected as follows:
1. gnwl:das s
I2 sae pesicioss, essployees mould have proves leadership, organisatiowl,
commiaativs and project man4gsw c abilities. Is other positions,
a Wleyees will be required to haw extensive knowledge of environmental
investigation aged enforcament procedures or proven cachnical knowledge
suck that the assplayse is recognized as as expert in a specific field. a
thoraugh kaowledte of a wide tangs of eaviromienral legislation,
rsgulatioas, gad policies as well as a working knowledge of relaxed
legislation and rotulacions is also mandatory.
2. Judytemonc
Park is performed under ge:seral direction. Judgement and tact are
essential to en-ordinate the secessary human and/or information resourcas
and to design and ortanise branch/regional stnd'les, surveys,
invesrigatioes with z4alsim input frm supervisors. Performing as a
speciallsc, a very high level of jadgameat is necessary since the person
asy bat the prime ministry. represoncaciwe dealing with industry,
mssnieipalities or consultants and may develop options independently and
preseac those to a clisac group.
V esviroaMnneal investigators, judgement is required is implement
appropriate legal action. Judgement is also required when collecting
evido*C11taking scataments/abserving rules of evidence/preparing gad
semis= loss; documents.
firfeau"000
e�
September 1, 1987 July S, 1988 9 12
APPENDIX 5 , oaQe 2
CWd� CLASS STANOAAOS
�.onKwssbn .
Onom
coup PREAMBL9
TECHNICAL SLStVICLS TS-07 ELSOURCES SMO=T
t nes ENVIRONMENTAL OTfICEE fps CoCe
i
I
Emmiremmiemtal Officer 3 Comt4d.
3. Ac:ountabilitl:
m
�ar.
In positions allocated to this level, 'esplOytts are fully accountable for:
co—ordination of pngran and staff/de4isiona aide with respect to matters
Involving areas of expertise/preparation and review of reports/preparation
and execution of prosecution packages: Inappropriate recoeendations/
inadequate technical findings or ineo"lete documentation of evidence
could result in coasiderablo financial losses to the ministry and to other
parties and loss of the ministry's credibility and prestige.
6. Contacts:
Tho work involves a wide variety of continuing contacts with governmental
and industrial officialslat the operational, technical, professional and
management levels/court and other enforcement agencies/eleeted officials,
the general public, the media, consultants, developers, contractors/health
officials and technical, scientific and engineering officials of the
ministry, other provincial ministries,' the Government of Canada and
international agencies.
The contacts are for the purposes of exchanging information, providing
advice and direction, discussing complex technical matters with experts
from outside agencies, preparing gad assisting lawyers with prosecutions,
publishing interpretive data, making recommendations, planning
co—operative studios such as research projects funded by the ministry or
enforcing regulations. They may be tailed to give evidence on technical
matters or to appear as an expert witness before administrative tribunals
such as the Laviroamental Assessmsat Board at a court of law. Tbey may be
required to make presentations at public meetings. In all contacts, the
employee officially represents the ministry.
infective Dare Issued Page