HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-0575.Amos et al.91-01-14~, :i; ~i~'~ ' a ONTARIO EMPLOY~SOELA COURONNE
.... · ' ' CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L'ONTARtO
BOARD DES GRIEFS
180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2100, TORONTO, ONTARK1 MSG 1Z8 TELEPHONE/T~'LE.~OIVE,~ (4 ~6) $26- 1388
180, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, BUREAU 2100, TORONTO {ONTARIOJ. M5G 1Z8 FACS/MfLE/T~L~COPiE ; (476) 325-
575/88
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
: Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVkNCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
OPSEU (Amos et al)
Grievor
- and-
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Health)
Employer
BEFORE: B. Keller Vice-Chairperson P. Klym Member
I. Cowan Member
FOR THE R. Wells
GRIEVOR Counsel
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
Barristers & Solicitors
FOR THE D. Costen
EMPLOYER Counsel
Human Resources Secretariat
Management Board of Cabinet
HEARING: December 7, 1989
November 21, 1990
December 4, 1990
DECISION
The grievors seek to have their positions reclassified. Six are
currently c~assified as Industrial Officer 1 (Atypical) - (I.O.
1). They seek a Berry£type order. The remaining two grievors
are currengly classified as Industrial Officer 1 (Atypical).
This decision deals only with the 1.0. i grievances, the parties
having agreed that the I.O. 2 grievances would be heard, if
required, ~ollowing the issuance of this~decision.
The grievors are all employed as work instructors in the
vocational services division at the Oakridge facility of the
Ministry in Penetanguishene. The followihg position
specification was agreed by the grievors to be generally
accurate:
To supervise and instruct patients performing work
in various workshops and/or hospital service areas
of Oak Ridge maximum security facility while
maintaining a maximum level of safety and
security. To provide ongoing reports and
assessments of work habits and behaviour of
patient workers.
Duties and related tasks (what is employee
required to do, how and why? Indicate percentage
of time spent on each duty)
Ensures maintenance of therapeutic asDects of work
Droqrammes by:
- assessing, ev.aluating, instructing and
supervising patients in various work areas;
- explaining requirements and details of work to
be performed;
- assessing of work performed (quality control);
- teaching patients good work habits and
appropriate work behaviors in various work
areas;
5% - teaching patients safety rules of assigned
work area;
- frequent monitoring of each patient in the
various work areas, including work habits,
stability~ attitudes toward fellow workers and
staff;
- reporting and recording changes in a patient's
behavior in the work area;
- recording patient progress on the clinical
file with reference to patient treatment plan;
- diScussing.progress with assigned patients,
i.e., ,explaining evaluations;
- teaching proper use of tools and materials to
patient workers.
Ensures maintenance of a maximum level of safety
and security by:
- carrying out on-going security checks of
patients and areas assigned;
- supervising patients known to be capable of
harming themselves or others;
15% - frequent checking of tools and equipment in
use, accounting .for same at alltimes and
ensuring thei~ return at the end of the work
period;
- using discretion when handing out tools or
assigning equipment being certain patient is
capable and stable enough to handle same (e.g.
sharp chisels, saws, scissors, drills, knives,
hammers, .air guns, toxic materials, glue
thinners, paint remover, caustic solutions)
which, if wrongly used, could be lethal
weapons (to harm himself or others);
- supervising patient movement from wards 'to
work areas and back, and to various other
related areas throughout the hospital;
**Incumbents maintain security vigilance 100% of
their time. In this position, the 15% time
allocations should not mislead or underscore the
extreme importance of this key duty.
Assists with the settinq up and oDerati@n of work
programmes by:
- discussing production schedules and methods
for each job, planning work layout and
assignments according to available patient
manpower and production demands;
15% - issuing tools and materials to various work
groups at the commencement of each work period
and receiving the same back at the end of each
period;
- maintaining all tools and equipment in good
working order to ensure ease of handling and
safety of workers;
- maintaining production figures (units
produced, materials used, etc.) on work
performed.
Maintain liaison with other staff by:
- maintaining close communications with fellow
workers, supervisor.and other staff when
appropriate in dealing with problems/issues
related to patient cure.and workshop
operations;
15% - meeting regularly with supervisor and fellow
workers and/or other staff to discuss patient
progress, therapeutic value of various work
activities, programme changes, safety and
security, etc.
Performs related duties such as:
5% - assisting attendant staff in providing
programmes and security in other areas of the
'hospital as directed (i.e. 3/4 hour daily
dining room supervision, or supervising
recreational activities as required);
- other related duties as assigned.
We classified this position in accordance with the
Civil Service Commission Classification Standards
for the following reason:
Responsible for providing supervision and
instruction to patients performing work in various
workshops.
Work performed in a maximum security facility
maintaining safety and security.
Perform' ongoing assessment and reports of
patients~ w~rk habits and behaviour.
The Class Standard which applies is:
INDUSTRIAL OFFICER 1
CLASS DEFINITION:
Employees in positions allocated to this class
instruct and direct an assigned group of inmates
in the processing in volume of various products,
food, clothing and maintenance supplies at
reformatories and industrial farms. These duties
do not require skills to the level of the
designated trades.
They share responsibility with their supervisors,
and with any custodial officers assigned, for the
security and work performance of inmate helpers.
They ensure the observance of safety precautions,
demonstrate methods, and assist in maintaining
quality control and in meeting production
schedules.
They submit reports on any irregularities and make
recommendations for changes in routine or for
disciplinary action. They ensure the proper use
of equipment and direct and assist in necessary
repairs. In most positions they participate in
all operations supervised in order to demonstrate
and maintain reasonable work standards.
OUALIFICATIONS:
1. Grade 8 education, preferably Grade 10;
practical knowledge of skills related to the
work to be performed.
2. Two years of satisfactory related experience,
part of which may have been on custodial
duties.
3. Supervisory and instructional ability related
to'the kind of work to be performed; ability
to deal effectively with inmates; ability to
assess standards of inmates' industry and
conduct.
A more complete explanation of the functions of the grievors was
given by 3 of them. Mr. Kenneth T. Popple, Director Vocational
and Recreation Services in response to a question from his
counsel, acknowledged the characterization of the grievors' to be
accurate.
The grievors currently work in the vocational work shops at the
institution~ The six are inter-changeable and have occasion to
work in each of the shops. It was agreed that the principle aim
of some of the shops, such as woodworking, has changed over the
years. At some time in the past, production - both for the
institution and outside customers - was a main goal. Over the
last number of years production has become a non-issue. The
principle ro~e of the shops and the grievors is the treatment of
patients with the specific goal of preparing the patients to be
reintegrated into the community at the highest working level
possible.
Before a patient is accepted to work in the shops an assessment
is performed by an I.O. 1. There are specific criteria, some of
which are objective and others which call for a subjective
determination by the assessor. Following this initial assessment
the I.O. 1 decides whether a patient can enter the program or
not. There is a patient appeal if refused but no decision of an
I.O. 1 has yet been reversed.
Once accepted into the program, the patient goes through an
assessment phase, for which an I.O. 1 is responsible, prior to a
specific tr~atment Plan being developed. The treatment plan is
developed by a vocational counsellor partially based on the
assessment done by the I.O. 1. The I.O. 1 reviews the plan and
if there is any disagreement with it, "negotiates" changes to it
with the vocational counsellor~ The treatment plan forms part of
the total patient program.
Once a treatment plan is developed, daily, weekly and monthly
assessments of each patient are dohe by the I.O. 1. Each is
designed to further the goals of the program.
Within each shop the I.O. 1 has day-to-day responsibility for
furthering the patients individual program. It is as a result of
the assessment of the I.O. 1 that a patient's incentive pay is
determined and also, ultimately, whether the plan should be
modified and even whether a patient should remain in the program.
It is within the ambit of the above that the various duties as
outlined in;the position specification are performed.
The union takes the position that the classification standard,
developed ~in August 1963 has been over-taken by time.
Specifically, it is argued that the production-oriented standard
no longer accurately reflects the treatment and rehabilitation
role now played by the I.O. Is.
The employer argues that the standard is still an accurate
reflection of the I.O. 1 duties. We are told that there are
three main components to' the class standard - supervision,
security, and reporting and assessing - and all the duties
performed by I.O. ls are subsumed within them.
The current role and duties as explained by the ioO. 1 - with
which the employer concurred - establishes to the satisfaction of
the Board that the 1963 standard is not a proper reflection of
the real roles performed today by the grievors. There is, in
fact, a substantial difference in the work actually performed and
the characterization of the standard. This is not surprising and
is explained by the change of emphasis in the shops from
'production ~o rehabilitation. It is only natural that the duties
of the I.O. 1 similarly have changed to adapt' to the new
direction and goals.
In sum we are satisfied that the class standard does not reflect
the realities of the job today. They are now partners in the
clinical team of each patient. They play an integral role in the
development of the treatment plan for each patient and their
ongoing assessment. This is nowhere contemplated in the class
standard and is what causes the grievance to succeed.
By way of remedy, the grievors seek a "Berryitype'' award.
Essentially this means that the current class standard into which
the grievors have been put is not appropriate and that it is the
responsibility of the employer to fit them into an apprcpriate
standard or~ if necessary, develop one. In practice and fact, it
is the latter which normally takes place.
Concern h.as been expressed about this type or order.
Particularly, the argument goes, a multiplicity of class
standards are being generated each to some extent in isolation
which has negative consequences on the integrity of the
classification schema in general. It also makes administering
the classification program difficult.
It is hard to argue with the above concerns. -But the fact
'remains that employees have a' right to be properly classified.
Improper classification almost inevitably costs an employee
money. It also goes without saying that this Board has an
adjudicative role to fulfill. That means that it must assess
each grievance on its merits. Given the many, if not most class
standards are many years old, and given the natural evolution of
jobs, it is not surprising that the class standards no longer, in
many cases, reflect the reality of the work place. So long as
they don't it is likely that Berry-type orders will continue to
issue. The resolution of the matter lies not with the Board, but
ultimately with the parties.
The grievances succeed. The employer is ordered to take the
necessary ~teps to properly classify the I.O. is. They shall
have 90 days from the issuance of this decision to do so. Should
the employer have difficulty with the time period set out, it is
to inform the union and the Board in writing within ten days of
the issuance of this order, detailing its difficulties and
specifying, in detail, a work plan and schedule in which it will
fulfill the order. The union shall have ten days from that time
to make its position known following which the Board will confirm
or modify this order. Modification should.not be anticipated -
until otherwise notified, the employer is to work towards the 90
day time limit.
The Board remains seized to deal with any issue arising from the i
implementation of this decision.
Nepean tb~s lath day of January 1~91.
M. Brian Keller, V±ce-Cha±~erson
Peter Klym, Member
I. Cowan, Member