HomeMy WebLinkAboutBaker 00-07-07IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN:
FANSHAWE COLLEGE
("the College")
and
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
("the Union")
AND 1N THE MATTER OF A CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF
KATHLEEN BAKER (OPSEU ii 99D 159)
ARBITRATOR: Ian Springate
APPEARANCES
For the Employer: Sheila Wilson, Human Resources Consultant
Deb McEwan, Manager of Community Programs
For the Union: Louise Watt, Presenter
Barb Ford, Advisor
Kathleen Baker, Grievor
HEARING: In London on April 28, 2000
The grievor performs a variety of clerical, coordinating and
facilitative functions at the College's James N. Allan campus in Simcoe. On
July 15, 1999 the College reclassified her position from that of an Atypical
Clerk at payband 7 to a Support Services Officer A at payband 8. The
change was made retroactive to October 1, 1998. On August 24, 1999 the
grievor filed a grievance which contended that she had been improperly
classified. In her grievance she asked that her position be reclassified to that
of a Support Services Officer at payband 9.
With one exception the grievor accepts the accuracy of a position
description form prepared by the employer. The exception relates to the
amount of prior experience required by someone in her position. The union
disputes the rating for the factor of experience assigned by the College under
the applicable job classification rating system.
The union also challenges the ratings given by the College for the
factors of physical demand and responsibility for decisions and actions. It
does not take issue with the College's ratings respecting nine other factors.
As noted above, the grievor performs a variety of different functions.
These include providing front line student services support for adult training
and longer-duration contract training programs. Many of the students
enrolled in these programs are sponsored by Human Resources Development
Canada or another agency. The grievor deals with inquiries from potential
students and later follows-up with them. She also acts as liaison with
sponsoring agencies.
The grievor provides assistance to students with respect to the Ontario
Student Awards Program and student housing. She interviews individual
students with a representative of their sponsoring agency to address the
student's progress and any attendance concerns. If the grievor identifies
problems respecting the student's progress or attendance she raises them
with her supervisor.
The grievor registers students for technical programs and for a literacy
and basic skills program. She provides secretarial and clerical support with
respect to contract training as well as typing services for adult education.
She administers and scores a pre-admission typing test for an office
essentials program. In a0ctition, she l~elps set up int'ormation sessions t'or
technical and post secondary programs and at times conducts information
sessions for the office essentials program.
The grievor is involved in organizing student orientations. She
testified that she performs a lot of the related clerical work and coordinates
events with the student council. Because students in technical programs
often start at different times she does their orientation.
The grievor is the staff advisor to the student council and attends their
meetings. She works with the student council to organize an awards banquet
in connection with graduation. This includes assisting the students to
arrange for a caterer and a disk jockey.
The grievor helps to organize campus graduation ceremonies. She
prepares graduation lists, sends out invitations to students and guests,
prepares the graduation program and requests certificates and diplomas from
thc Rcgistrar's office. She is present at graduation to help organize the
processional.
The grievor establishes and maintains student records. She enters
information changes and grades into student files by keying information into
a computer. At times thc grievor is required to check student records that
are not on a computer. This involves retrieving paper files. She physically
moves files to dead storage at the end of each semester and also when
certain technical programs finish prior to the end of a semester.
Among her other duties the gricvor is responsible for providing front
line telephone service for the campus. She testified that she does a lot of
telephone work putting calls through to other areas of the College.
The grievor reports to Ms. Deb McEwan, Manager of Community
Programs. In addition to her other responsibilities Ms. McEwan is
responsible for all contract training at the Simcoe campus.
THE FACTOR OF EXPERIENCE
The applicable job evaluation manual indicates that the factor of
experience is meant to measure the minimum amount of related work
experience necessary to fulfill the requirements of a position.
The College rated this factor at level 3, which is worth 32 points under
the job classification system. The union claims that a level 4 rating worth 45
points is more appropriate. Thc relevant factor level definitions and
illustrative classifications contained in the job evaluation manual read as
follows:
3. More than one year and up to three years of practical
experience.
Caretaker B; Clerk General C; Library Technician B; Support
Services Officer A, B
4. More than three years and up to five years of practical
experience.
Clerk General D; Secretary B, C; Technician C; Technologist B
The position description form prepared by the College describes the
minimum level of required prior experience as being "3 years previous
office experience including 2 years experience in dealing with HRD and
employer sponsored training policy and delivery." This language suggests
that the position requires at least three years previous office experience. At
the hearing, however, the spokesperson for the College explained that the
College uses the phrase "3 years" to mean "up to three years".
The grievor testified that she started with the College on a part-time
basis in 1980 and became l'ttll-time in 1983. She said that she spent ten
years dealing with the Ontario Skills Development Program and many years
dealing with I-Iuman Resources Development Canada and other sponsors.
She contended that her position requires prior experience dealing with
sponsors such as Human Resources Development Canada in order to know
the people who work there, how they work and their policies. She also said
that over the years she had acquired a lot of background and experience in
helping students.
Ms. McEwan gave evidence on behalf of the College. She testified
that a minimum of three years office experience, including two years
experience dealing with Human Resources Development Canada, is required
to perform the grievor's job. In response to a later question fi:om the
spokesperson for the College Ms. McEwan repeated that three years office
cxpcricncc is a minimum requirement.
The College's submissions respecting the factor of experience
contained in a brief filed prior to the hearing are set out below. The
spokesperson for the College elaborated on these submissions at the hearing.
This factor measures the minimum amount of practical
experience to fulfil the requirements of the position. As
outlined in the CAAT Support Staff Job Evaluation Manual, it
is the responsibility of the College to define and structure
po~itiom, including thc determination of qualifications and skill
level required to perform the resPective duties. Throughout the
job evaluation process an important consideration is the fact
that the position is being evaluated and not the assessment of an
individual's knowledge or experience.
The training/technical skills factor has an evaluation factor of
level 5 - a two-year community college diploma or equivalent.
Along with the training/technical skills the College determined
the minimum experience required to perform this role is up to
three years of practical experience. The primary responsibility
of this role is to provide front line customer service (40%) and
maintenance of students' records (30%) - PDF page 003. The
required minimum experience to perform this activity is
appropriately evaluated at level 3. Please note the academic
training and experience for SSOA and SSOB guide charts are
identical - 2 year college diploma and more than one year and
up to three years of practical experience.
As noted above, it was Ms. McEwan's evidence was that at least three
years of previous office experience is required in order to perform the
grievor's position. The grievor's evidence suggested that her experience
assists her to cio the jol~. For its part the College relies on the thct that the
job evaluation guide charts for the Support Services Officer A and B
positions refer to more than one year and up to three years of practical
experience. The guide charts are part of the job evaluation system binding
on the parties. Accordingly, if the grievor's duties were limited to the typical
duties of a Support Services Officer A or B as set out in the guide charts I
would utilize the experience rating suggested by the charts. Certain of the
grievor's duties, however, are of the type that would typically be performed
by a Clerk or a Secretary as opposed to a Support Services Officer. The
illustrative classifications for a level 4 rating indicate that employees in a
senior Clerk or mid-level Secretary position may require more prior
experience than a typical Support Services Officer A or B. Because of this I
do not believe it appropriate to disregard the evidence led at the hearing
because of the illustrative classifications. I also do not propose to disregard
the evidence respecting the required level of experience due to the agreed
upon rating for the factor of training/technical skills.
Ms. McEwan is thc gricvor's supervisor. She is also the manager
responsible for contract training at the Simcoe campus. She testified that an
individual requires at least three years of prior office experience in order to
perform the position in question. On the basis of this evidence I fred that
level 4, reflecting more than three years and up to five years of practical
experience, is the appropriate rating.
PHYSICAL DEMAND
This factor measures the demand on physical energy required to
complete tasks. Consideration is given to the type and duration of physical
effort, the frequency, strain from rapid and repetitive fine muscle
movements or the use of larger muscle groups and the lack of flexibility of
movement.
The College rated the grievor's position at level 2, which is worth 16
points. The union contends that level 3, which produces 28 points, is a more
appropriate rating. The definitions and illustrative classifications for these
two levels are as follows:
2 Job duties require some physical demand. There is an
occasional requirement for repetition and/or speed. Employee
usually has comfortable bodily positions with flexibility of
movement.
Employee uses recurring light physical effort.
OR
Occasional light physical effort.
Bus Driver; Secretary A, B, C; Security Guard; Clerk General B, C, D;
Programmer A, B, C
3 Job duties require regular physical demand. There is a
regular need for speed and repetitive use of muscles. Employee
is in uncomfortable or awkward bodily positions for short
periods of time with some flexibility of movement.
Employee uses continuous light physical effort,
OR
recurring periods of moderate physical effort
OR
occasional periods of heavy physical effort.
Caretaker A, B; Early Childhood Education Worker; Switchboard
Operator; Technologist A, B; Clerk General A
The job evaluation manual indicates that the term "occasional" is a
reference to "part" of a day, "recurring" means "most" of a day and
"continuous" refers to "all of the time".
The unchallenged wording of the position description form respecting
physical demand reads as follows:
Minimal physical demand. The incumbent works in a normal
office environment and has the flexibility to change positions.
May sit at desk or workstation for long periods of time when
keying in data.
Indicate the percentaee of time that is required in performin~
each of the tasks discussed above.
Task Sitting at desk when keying in data. % of Time more than
50%.
The above wording is more suggestive of a level 2 than a level 3
rating. It is noteworthy that a secretary A, B, and C are illustrative
classifications for a level 2 rating. This indicates that keyboarding is not by
itself a basis for a level 3 rating, particularly if the employee has comfortable
bodily positions with flexibility of movement.
The gricvor's evidence was that speed is a requirement of her position,
particularly at the start of a semester. Ms. McEwan testified that once a year
in September the grievor faces significant deadlines when speed is required
but otherwise she has a fair degree of mobility. She also noted that the
grievor's responsibilities involve talking with students. This situation does
not reasonably involve a regular need for speed as contemplated by the
criteria for a level 3 rating.
When testifying about the physical demand associated with her
position the grievor referred to the fact that her job includes retrieving files
and physically moving records at the end of a semester and at other times
when technical programs finish. She said that although she uses a cart there
is lifting involved. She indicated that she can obtain help from a part-time
custodian at the campus to do the lifting. In my view the relatively
infrequent nature of the activity does not involve a regular physical demand
such as to warrant an increase in the rating given by the College.
I confn'm the level 2 rating given by the College.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR DECISIONS AND ACTIONS
The College rated the grievor's position at level 3 for 44 points. The
union rated it at level 4 for 62 points. The factor level definitions and
illustrative classifications for these ratings are as follows:
3 Decisions and/or actions have moderate impact on the
organization. Errors are usually detected by verification and
review and may result in disruption of the workflow,
duplication of effort, and/or limited waste of resources.
Clerk General C, D; General Maintenance Worker; Reproduction
Equipment Operator B, C; Secretary B, C
4 Decisions and/or actions have considerable impact on the
organization. Errors are detected after the fact and may result
in considerable interruption and delay in work output and waste
of resources.
Early Childhood Education Worker; Stationary Engineer C; Support
Services Officer B, C; Technologist B, C
The wording of the position description form with respect to this
factor is as follows:
11.1 Describe the impact that the incumbent's decisions and/or
actions have on internal and public relations, the responsibility
for information management, equipment, assets and records.
Incumbent's duties have moderate impact on public relations.
Incorrect information in student records or retrieval from
student records could have considerable impact on student or
referring agency.
If student attendance or behaviour problems are not dealt with,
agency, employer or attribution problems may develop,
resulting in significant loss of revenue to the college.
Identify the processes used to detect errors and the effect on the
organization if errors are not discovered and corrected.
Committee work - run through the process and procedures to
safeguard against missing steps. Needs to make sure
nothing/no one is missed which could lead to embarrassment at
graduation ceremonies.
Whcn ncccssary work is proofread/doublechecked. Minimal
impact.
The grievor testified that if she should fail to follow up with
prospective students a course might not be full and this would impact on
revenue. She also suggested that it would create a major embarrassment if
she should fail to invite someone to graduation or left someone off the
graduation list. She noted that she keeps track of fees owed by students.
She said that at times she has decided not to hand out bursary cheques to
students who were not attending classes until after first checking with
Student Awards.
Ms. McEwan testified that she meets with the grievor with respect to
the number of students enrolled in various courses and asks her if she has
done follow-ups. She also noted that any significam problems the grievor
encounters with students are referred to her. Ms. McEwan contended that
most errors made by the grievor would be picked up by someone else. She
indicated that employee Terry Button uses a spreadsheet to keep track of
student fee payments. She suggested that a student would complain if the
grievor failed to enter a grade.
In its brief the union contended that misjudgments by the grievor
could have severe detrimental effects on the academic process. It did not,
however, specify what these effects might be. The brief also contended that
the grievor must make decisions quickly and consistently exercise good
judgement. In addition, it noted that she deals with confidential information.
These considerations, however, are not directly relevant to the factor of
responsibility for decisions and actions. The level of independent judgement
required for a position is measured by the judgement factor. The handling of
contidential information is taken into account in assessing the factor of
communications/contacts.
The criteria for a level 3 and a level 4 rating indicate that what is
being measured by the factor of responsibility for decisions and actions is
the impact of decisions and/or actions on "the organization". The
organization is presumably the College as a whole or some major division
within the College as opposed to an individual student. There is nothing in
the position description form or the evidence to suggest that an error on the
part of the grievor would have a considerable impact on either the College or
thc Simcoc campus bccausc of a considcrablc interruption and dclay in work
output and waste of resources. This is the type of impact required for a level
4 rating. Accordingly, I confirm the level 3 rating given by the College.
THE APPROPRIATE PAYBAND
The College's rating of the grievor's position resulted in the position
receiving a total of 532 points. This was within the 511 - 570 point range
covered by payband 8. My f'mding that a 4 rating is appropriate for the
factor of experience raises this by 13 points to a total of 545. This is still
within the range for payband 8. The grievance is, accordingly, hereby
dismissed.
Dated this 7th day of June 2000.
Afbitrat6r
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT 5TAPF CLA,~IFICATION
-~ Cen~ Classification; ~ O ~ , . and Present Payband:
Job F~mily and Payband Requested by Grjevor: ~U
1, Position Description Form A~ached
2, ~ The pa~ies agree on the contents of the a~a~ed
~ The Union disagrees with the content~ of the a~ached Position Description Form. The specific details of this
disagreement are as follows:
(uSe reverse'
FACTORS ~;~[~ UNION .... ARBIT~TOR '
Level Pelnt~ Level ~ Level Poln~
8. Strain from Wo~ PressureslDemands.~e~dlines
9, Independent Action ..-
10. CommunicationslCon~cJs
12, Work Environment
A~ACHED WRI~EN SUBMISSIONS: ~ The Union ~ The College
~ FOR ~A,A~,MENT