Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-0670.White, Foster & Kellar.90-09-25- ~ ONTARIO EMPLOY~-SDELA COURONNE ~ CROWN EMPLOYEES DE I'ONTARIO GRIEVANCE C~OMMISSION DE SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT BOARD DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, TORONTO, ONTARIO. MSG I~.8- SUITE2100 TELEPHONE/T~'L~'PHONE 180, RuE DUNOAS OUEST. TORONTO, (ONTARIO.~ MSG lZ8 - BUREAU2100 (4t6) 598-0688 670/88, 783/88 IN THE MATTER OF AN A/{BITPJkTION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN O~SEU (white/Foster/Kellar} Grievor - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (~inf~t=y of Transportation) Employer - and - S, Stewart Vice-Chairperson I. Thomson Member D. Walkinshaw Member FOR THE C. Dassios GRIEVOR Couns'el Gowling, Strathy & Henderson Barristers & Solicitors FOR THE M. Failes EMPLOYER Counsel Winkler, Eilion & Wakely Barristers & Solicitors HEARING: December 21, 1989 March 21, 1990 DECISION The grievors, G. Kellar, R. Foster and J. White, are employed by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications in the position of Landscape Foreman. The grievors all claim that they are imProperly classified. The grievance of Mr~ Foster is dated May 17, 1987, Mr. ~ White's grievance is dated May 17, 1988 and Mr. Kellar's grievance is dated August 9, 1988.. It was. agreed that the grievances would be consolidated. Mr. White and Mr. FOster work in th'e MinistrY's central region, out of the. Kipling Avenue office in Toronto. The position specifications for their position are attached hereto as Appendix A. Mr. Kellar is employed ini!the Ministry's Bancroft office and the specifications fo~ his position are attached hereto as Appendix B' The position of Landscape Foreman in both locations is classified as Highway General Foreman/woman, the Class Standard for which is attached hereto as Appendix C. The grievors seek an order reclasSify'ing them as Maintenance Foreman/woman, the Class Standard' for which is attached hereto as Appendix D. Alternatively, they Seek a "Berry order",, an order that a new classification be established for their positions. It was agreed that Mr. F0ster's evidence regarding the. duties of the Landscape Foreman position Would apply to his duties in this position as well as to the duties of Mr. 2 White~ Mr. Foster has been employed by the Ministry since 1954. He commenced working with the Ministry as a manual worker and assumed the Landscape Foreman's position in 1971 or 1972 when he.was assigned the supervision of tree removal during the winter months. In 1974 or 1975 he commenced working in this position on a full-time basis and performed these duties, un=il April 3, 19'89, when he was promoted to the position of District Landscape Supervisor. Mr. Foster testified that at the Kipling office there are two Landscape Foremen. They are supervised by {he District Landscape Supervisor which is a management position. At the-time of the grievance the two Landscape Foremen were each responsible for Supervising three Landscape Workers. As well, each had two Highway Equipment Operators as part of their crews. Two manual worker "premiums", manual workers in training to be Landscape Workers, were also assigned to.each foreman. In addition, each foreman was assigned three manual workers. In the summer, students of horticulture were assigned to the crew as well. Mr. Foster stated that the job specifications for the position (Appendix A) are an accurate reflection of the duties of the position. He stated that the "skilled" workers referred to in the specifications are the Landscape 3 Workers. Mr. Foster stated that the Landscape Workers are appropriately described as "skilled" because they are required to ~ossess & licence in order to spray pesticides. As well,, the majority of the Landscape Workers also possess a horticulturalist landscaper greenskeeper licence issued pursuant to the Apprenticeship and Tradesmen's Oualification Act although it is not a requirement of this ~osition that such a licence be held. The manual worker position is an entry level position° Employees' generakly stay in this position for nine months to one year. In that position they are assigned duties such as planting pru.hing and assisting in the removal' of ' trees. They are given training with respect to health and. safety matters and the various pieces of legislation that affect their duties. As well, they are given training with respect to safe use Of the Various pieces of equipment used. Before a manual worker can progress to the manual worker premium position it is necessary for that person to obtain a Class 1 pesticides licence which authorizes the employee to administer herbicides. The manual Worker premium position involves duties such as tree maintenance, weed spraying and inspecting tree planting that has been carried out by contractors. Some training is given to,, prepare these employees for the Class 4 3 pesticides licence. The Class 3 licence allows employees to administer insecticides. Both Class 1 and ClaSs 3 pesticides l~Cences are issued by the Ministry of Environment, which provides .a four day course and a one day examination. These employees are also given further training with respect to .matters such as tree removal. Employees generally remain in this position for a year to two years at which time they may progress to the Landscape Worker position. in order to become a Landscape Worker it is necessary for an employee to pass an examination administered by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications. This requirement has been in existence since at least 1966. This is an oral written and practical examination which . takes one. day to complete and tests substantive knowledge and abilities in the field. Landscape Workers are not required to have a Class 3 licence but Mr. Foster stated that it is preferred that they do have this licence. Landscape Workers must possess a Class 1 pesticides licence and a DZ equipment operator's licence. The requirement for a DZ 1.icence has been in existence only for the last year or so. Four of the six Landscape Workers supervised by Mr. Foster and Mr. White at the time of the grievance had a horticulturalist certificate although the possession of this certificate is not a requirement for the position. 5 Unlike trades such as plumbing and electrical, the possession of a certificate is. not compulsory in order that a person may perform horticultural work. Landscape Workers are required to have knowledge of tree removal, pesticides, herbicides, contract inspection, relevant statutory provisions and the operation of equipment. The Class Standard for the Landscape Worker classification states that the employees perform "semi-skilled n~anual tasks". Mr. Foster stated that at any one time the Landscape Foreman has three to five crews to supervise in a wide geographical area. Accordingly, the Landscape Worker will :'. act as a lead hand on the crew, ensuring that the job is carried out properiy. Mr. Foster stated that he does. not carry out any "hands on" duties, except in the case of an emergency. Both Mr. Foster and Mr. White possess a certificate of qualification as a horticulturalist which is ~ssued pursuant to The Apprenticeship and Tradesmen's Qualification Act. They applied for and obtained the certificate under the "grandfathering" provisions that apply in the establishment of a new trade under the Act, on the basis' of the work they performed for the Ministry. As is the case for the Landscape Worker~ the possession of this certificate is not a requirement for the position of Landscape Foreman. As previously noted, it. is not a 6 requirement that a person working in this field be in possession of this certificate. Mr. Foster stated tha~ the Landscape Foreman is involved in planning work jointly with the District ,Landscape Supervisor. However, in cross-examination, he acknowledged that decisions relating to matters such as tree planting and the type of spray to be used would be made by his supervisor. If there ar'e circumstances such as changing site conditions he stated that he would be called upon to make a decision but acknowledged that the "final call" was made by his supervisor. Mr. Foster stated that over the years his job has changed in that it has become much more complicated due to increased enuironmental concerns and increased complexity of the .legislation governing his work. As well, he stated that increased traffic in the urban areas has made tree removal more difficult. In cross-examination, Mr. Foster acknowledged that the nature of his duties had not really changed over the years but that he has become involved in more paper work, the workload is heavier and there is a greater public relations aspect to his duties. He also acknowledged that the persons whose work he supervises perform much the same work as they did when he commenced working as a Landscape' For eman. 7 Mr. N. McKenna gave evidence on behalf of the Employer with respect to th~' manner in which work is carried out in the Central Region where Mr. Foster and Mr. White are employed. Mr. McKenna has been employed with the Ministry since 1966. He commenced performing the duties of District Landscape Supervisor in the central region at that time, when the position was classified as an Arboriculturalist 1. In 1971 he assumed idUties in the Ministry's head office, supplying technical information to' the northern districts, which' include Bancroft. In 1976 he returned to the central region to resume duties as a District Land Supervisor at which time the position became classified as an Arboriculturalist 2 atypical. In 1980 the position was reclassified to a management classificati6n. Mr. McKenna stated that his former duties of supervising the Landscape Foremen and having~ the responsibility for 'the delivery of landscape services remaned the same. However, after the re-classification of his position, he became more accountable for discipline and was required to attend grievance meetings: Mr. McKenna was promoted to the position of Traffic and Maintenance Supervisor in October 1988. Mr. McKenna agreed with Mr. Foster's evidence to the effect that the duties of the Landscape Foreman's position have become more complex but described it as a matter of' better enforcement of legislation and a greater concern about environmental issues such as the use of pesticides. He agreed with Mr. Dassios that tree removal has become more difficult because 'of increased traffic in. the Central Region. Mr. McKenna also agreed with Mr. Dassios that although a horticulturalist license is not required for the position of Landscape Foreman the Employer does benefit from the experience of employees who have qualified for a horticulturalist licence. As previously indicated, Mr. Kellar works out of the Bancroft office. He commenced' employment with the Ministry in 1971. Since 1978 or 1979 he has been employed as a Landscape Foreman and he is the only person in that position 'in the Bancroft office. Mr. Kellar has Class 1 and Class 3 pesticides licences. There is no District Land Supervisor in the Bancroft office and Mr. Kellar currently reports to the Services Supervisor whose position is one level above that of the District Landscape Supervisor. Mr. Kellar stated that because there is no District Land Supervisor he performs the work of that position. According to Mr. McKenna's evidence however, a' District Land Supervisor is not assigned to northern districts such as Bancroft as arbroiculturalists from the Head Office provide them with the necessary technical knowledge and assistance. According to Mr. McKenna, it is the Head 9 Office arbroiculturalists who advise as to the types of plantings to be carried out as well as the insecticides and herbicides to be usedl. ' By and large, Mr. McKenna's evidence with respect 'to the supervision of the Bancroft· office was confirmed by Mr. Kellar, who explained that he. forwards plans to TOronto for review and approval. The areas that are not handled in this manner are visited by Mr. Kellar and a person from head office at which time the plan is developed. :Mr. Kellar may make ad'justments to the plans due to on site Problems, such as rocks or old road beds · .~ Between April 1 and November 1, Mr. Kellar is involved in forestry and landscape operations. For the balance of the year he is night 'patrol supervisor which involves supervising staff on plowing, sanding and winter maintenance operations although he may periodically be involved in landscaping or forestry duties. Mr. Kellar stated that Appendix B is a "fairly accurate" description of his duties with .ithe exception that he felt that he should properly be described as supervising skilled as well as semi-skilled workers as he feels that the Landscape Workers that he supervises are skilled workers. Mr. Kellar supervises one crew, which consists of three Landscape Workers and one seasonal manual worker° Contract 10 employees are hired in the summer as they are required. One of the Landscape Workers that Mr. Kellar supervises has a Class i and a Class 3 pesticides licence and'the two others have 'Class 1 licences. Neither Mr Kellar.nor his Landscape Workers are licenced as horticulturalists. Mr. Kellar~ carries out performance evaluations for the employees he supervises. Mr. Kellar stated that he is responsible .for disciplining staff but indicated that if written discipline were to be imposed he 'would refer the matter to his supervisor. Mr. Kellar estimated that he spends one day per week perfoming "hands on" duties with his crew. In addition to these.duties Mr. Kellar ~is responsible for dealing with public complaints. As well, he is involved in preparing permits for tree removal which are signed .by his supervisor. Mr. Kellar stated that if an urgent situation existed he would authorize the cutting of a tree prior to the issuance of the. permit but the permit would nevertheless be signed by the supervisor. He is also responsible for preparing the annual l'andscape budget. The budget for last year was $260,000.00. Mr. Kellar acknowledged, however, that his supervisor is responsible for approving the budget that he has prepared. The issue fom this Board to determine is whether the duties and responsibilities of the Landscape Foreman positions as carried out by the grievers are properly classified as Highway General Foreman. Mr. Dassios acknowledged that the Class Standard for the Highway. General Foreman deals, specifically with the kind of work performed by the grieVers but submits that there are .critical aspects of this standard which do not have application to their work. The portions of this Class Standard that are directly relevant are as'follows: This class also covers positions of foremen/ women who are responsible for carrying out specialized maintenance operations within a District such as zone painting, inspecting, repairing an~ painting of bridges and land- scaping and related arboricultural work where . the general planning of such work is the re- spo.nsibility, of. a qualified Arboriculturalist 1. As a landscape foreman/woman they supervise semi-skilled staff in carrying out a variety of arboricultural tasks such as planting, pruning and removal of trees and shrubs, weed and brush spraying, sodding, seeding and general landscaping etc., on highway right-of-way and other ministry property. Mr. Dassios submilts that the Class Standard'for Highway General Foreman/woman does not apply to the work performed by the grievers in two.significant respects. The first is that th~ work that they perform is not under the supervision of an Arboriculturalist 1. In this regard he emphasizes that the supervisor of the gr. ievo~s Fost~r and 12 White was initially reclassified upwards as an Arboriculturalist 2 and then again classified upwards into a management position. In Mr. Dassios' submission the upward classification of the supervisor must have been in recognition of the increase in responsibilties in .this area of the department. He argued that the grievors ~have · remained in their original classification without the increase in their responsibilities being recognized. In the case of Mr. Kellar, he is also not supervised by an Arboriculturalist 1 but is supervised by a person even higher in the hierarchy than the District Landscape Supervisor. We cannot accept that the supervision o~ employees by a person in a classification other than that referred to in the Class Standard leads to the conclusion that the employ~ees are improperly classified. 'Whatever the reason for the reclassification of Mr. McKenna's position, .there is no evidence to suggest that there were any functions formerly performed by the supervisor that were no longer performed by him and were reassigned to the grievors. Rather, the uncontradicted evidence of Mr. McKenna was that he .continued to perform the same functions but assumed some additional responsibilities. Although Mr. Kellar's work is not supervised in the same manner as that of his counterparts in the central r~gion, and he is also not supervised by an Arboriculturalist 1, it is clear that he is provided with supervision from Head Office with respect to arboriculturalist matters. The second argument raised by Mr. Dassios in support of his position that the' Class Standard for the Highway General Foreman/woman does not apply to the grievors is that the Class Standard r'efers to the supervision of semi- skilled workers while, in his submission, ~he grievors supe.rvise skilled employees, the Landscape Workers° Mro Dassios emphasized that the job specifications for Mr. Foster's position, which were signed by a r~presentative of management, indicate that the two grievors in the ·central region supervise skilled as well as semi-skilled workers. Mr. Dassios submitted that whether or not the Employer requires the Landscape workers to be licenced under the-· Apprenticeship and Tradesmen's Qualifications Act they are engaged in the practice of a skilled trade and the Employer receives the benefit of their skill. ·Mr. Dassios referred to the progression from manual worker to the Landscape Worker position in support of his position that the Landscape Workers are properly described as skilled workers. He submitted that the fact that the Landscape Workers are described in the Class Standard as performing "semi-skilled manual tasks" as a "bootstrapping" argument that is not of assistance in determining the issue. In the abstract, the distinction between "skilled" work and "semi-skilled" work is not clear. However, in our view, the fact that the job specifications for Messrs. Foster and White refer to the fact that the Landscape Foremen supervise skilled workers cannot determine the issue, particularly in light'of the fact that the job specifications for Mr. Kellar, who supervises employees with skills similar to those of the employees supervised by Messrs. Foster and Kellar refers to those employees as semi-skilled. In our view, ~he fact that horticulture has been designated as a certified trade under the Apprenticeship and Tradesman's Qualifications Act is also not determinative. The Act differentiates among trades with respect to the the nature of the qualifications for certification and designating some of those trades as compulsory and some non-compulsory, giving r. ecognition to the fact that some trades involve greater skill than others. The possession of a certificate is not a requirement for the practice of horticulture, moreover, it is not a requirement of the Employer that employees possess the certificate. The issue of whether the work performed by the Landscape Workers is properly described as "skilled" as opposed to "semi-skilled" mcan however, ~be Iresolved in light of the particula'r provisions of the Class Standard for Highway General Foreman/woman.. This Class Standard 15" specifically refers to the particular tasks that are performed by the employees that the Landscape Foremen' supervise. The tasks listed include spraying, the task that these employees require 'a licence to perform. There is no question that those are the duties that the Landscape Workers perform and .have performed over the years. .The clear implication from this paragraph is that 'the duties performed by the Landscape Workers are defined as semi- skilled duties. Whether or not Mr~ Dassi°~ is correct with respect to the propriety Of considering the manner in which the duties are described in the Class Standard for the Landscape Workers, it. is our view that the provisions of the Class Standard for the Highway General Foreman/woman make it clear that the duties are properly characterized as semi-skilled and that. this conclusion is clear without the necessity Of resorting to the provisions of the Landscape. Worker Class Standard. For the reasons outlined above, we cannot accept Mr. Dassios' submission' that there are two fundamental aspects of the Highway General Foreman/woman Class Standard which are not applicable to the work performed by the grievors. While we accept that there have been some changes in the complexity of the legislative framework under which the grievors work .and the concerns..of the public with respect to environmental issues, we are not satisfied that these 16 changes have been significant enough to render the current classification inappropriate. In our view, the type of work that the grievors perform is precisely that contemplated by the Class Standard for the Highway G~neral Foreman/woman classification. While the duties performed by Mr. Kellar in the Bancroft area are somewhat different from those performed by Messrs. White and Foster in the central region, we note that the different areas of work that Mr. Kellar is 'involved in, such as preparing the budget, are subject to the approval of his supervisor. While Mr. Kellar has granted permits on an emergency basis withou.t approval the matter is subsequently reviewed by his supervior.' He performs more "on hands" work than that performed by his counterparts in Toronto. The range of duties that. he performs is greater than that performed by the other grievors but, in our view, these duties are not outside of the duties contemplated by the Class S.tandard for Highway General Foreman/woman. We are .satisfied that the Maintenance Foreman classification, the classification that the grievors claim is ap~propriate, does not. create as close a "fit" wi'th the duties of .the Landscape Foremen as that of their current classification. The preamble to the Maintenance Trade classes states: In most cases, in all 'of these classes, to qualify for the foreman level the position must involve the supervision of at least two journeymen .in a relevant trades class. In some positions however, the duties involve the hiring and supervision of qualified local tradesmen, on the site, for the duration of a specific project .... In all [emphasis in the original] positions in the maintenance mechanics or trades classes, the incumbents m~st devote at least 60% of their time to ~aintenance or skilled trades duties. The Maintenance Foreman Class Standard states that it: covers positions where the employee is a skilled tradesman or qualified Maintenance Mechanic, super- vising at least 'two employees at the Journeymen level in the performance of a variety of skilled maintenance tasks in a Government building, insti.tution, field station, or other establishment, including associated equipment and services or in the' field. In our view, this Class Standard is clearly intended to apply to .positions .t6 which certification in a Skilled trade and the ability to supervise, other persons who must possess a skilled trade are requirements of the position~. This is not the case "for the Landscape Foremen or 'the Landscape Workers who are not required by 'the Employer to be certified in a trade as a condition of employment. Nor, as previously indicated, is their trade one of those which requires certification before a person is .entitled to work in the trade. Their duties more closely refl'ect the supervision of persons carrying %he duties specifically referred to in the Class Standard for the Highway General Foreman/woman. For these reasons, it is our view that the' Maintenance Foreman classification is not a more appropriate classification for the griev0rs than the Highway General Foreman/woman classification. In view of our conclusions, we find it unnecessary to address the argument raised by Mr.. Failes arising from the fact that in 1983 this Board dismissed a grievance of Mr. Foster in which he alleged that he was improperly classified and that .he should have been classified as an Arboriculturalist 1. In addition, in view of our conclusions with respect to Mr. Kellar's work, we do not find it' necessary to address Mr. Failes' argument that the Maintenance Foreman/woman Class Standard does not have application to Mr. Kellar's position because he does not meet the minimum requirement with respect to supervision of what was argued to be skilled trades due to his other duties during the winter months. For the foregoing reasons, the grievances are dismissed. Dated at Toronto, %his 25day of .September 1990.  ~.. Stewart - Vice-Chairperson '~ Member ' / - ~>~ ( ' ' (IAefe; to ~ac~ ul form ~o; campledo~ in.'~Uuc~ons)  c~n~ol a4d end use . . - 4~an~ln~ ~or assistance f~om ~4C~o~, Service~ and ocher ~iaisC:~ ....... cofl ciaued . . iCape ~rocedu~es, ~l~h~ay ~a~fic AcC~ Occupational HedlCb and Sa~eC~ A~ and ~O~4n ~e OisCcicC celaCi~ to l~pi~ ~ a~ci~lCuc~ ~ck ~ece the 9enec~ pl~i~ of 26 ~ 05I G.A. Th~beaul= races a~e c~arged (according Co H.?.C. scheduie) recom~endin~ Co supervisor and/o~ Sorsona11~ re~uesCin~ [rom uCili=9 companies e.g. Ontario ~Vd~o [or reguired service~ I.e. line covet-up, power disconnect acc; perso~all~ conCacCin~ uCiliCv companies a~ required for stake-outs srtor co excavating lnspeocia~ dail~ progress and guallC~ of work performed ~ cre? chle~s - ensurin~ efgecCtve safety precautions ·nd traffic control ope~aCtons according CO H.~.C. Sollc~ · inmcrucCia~ and C~alnin~ sC·f[ tn proper a~plic·Cion of ~ll planCin~, sS£aslng~ ec~. verbal ~isctpAAne es reguAred~ providing A~puC for performance repo~cs all performance review meetings with su~o£dlnaces -. referring ma~or problems Co supervisor for a~vlce, guidance and/or resoluCiO~ (incumbents are held a~counCable for on-Che-~ob decisions) - a~gends pr~-ooncra¢c meeting, re: weed spraying, tree maintenance and and Inspection of work Co ensure~sfflcienc operation and *adh·fence co contractor and inspector regarding contract tncerp£ececion - routine field Inspection. od Landscape Planting in orde~ So o~-ordlnate [~cure maintenance re%uirsmenCs'during critical gzowzh periods and/or .. k~uCins maintenance · .. ensuring tempi·inapt of confidence ia rectifying problem ' - investigating and Inspecting e~utpmenc problems And deciding action; ·rrdn~in~ for repairs Ch£ough Gar·~e Foreman ·nd dssls~ing - recommending squlpmmn¢ modifications and needed repairs Co equipment superviso£ and/ow Garage ~orem·n Co improve efficiency · Patrol Staff, municipalities, publiC, sec. arranging dlracCl~ for appro- - completing · varie~g of refaced forms and documentation s.~. time - personally u~derCaklng * vsrie~9 Of gel·ced ~orescry and Landscape duties e.g~ subordlnaCe's ~lmo shee~s, expense accounts, W.C.~. forms, dangerous maintenance reporgin~ documents, D Z vehicle bOoks, h/red e~utpmenz rental -Caking samples of vegeCaClon regarding herbicide damage complaints, and plan~ diseases [or - Investigating complaints regsrding rodents and oa£rylng ouC o~ arranging for the epproprie=e extermination - ·sslstifl~ supervisor'in the Casting and evaluation of ~ew products and chemicals - reviewing and ensuring Chic documents, directives memos, ego. are under- stood b~ su~rd/nages and prope=l~ si~ned as regulred - ensuring chaC materials supplied b~ District Scores, private supplier~, etc. are properl~ labelled - Inspecting nurs~r~ stock from'various suppliers, approving and/or - reviewing and obtaining written permission =o remove Crees on priwaC~ prope~=~ which 4re hazardous Co the gravelling publl~ - assisting supervisor in preparation o~ an~=al budget ....... ~AG~ 3 o~ 3 abilic~ ~o operate ~ype "A' an~ 'Bo equipment as veil specialized Forestry and ~andscape equipment; must have Class Pesticide licence (preferably Cla~s I & ~3]; supervisory ability: good communication skills; writing and mathematical skills: interpersonal skills; organizing and co-o~dinaCin~ ~bili~¥: ability ~a intecgce~ construction and l~ndscage drawings; good understanding and vock$ng knowledge of collective agreement, HainCenance: Hanagement System; good physicai condi~ion; willing to work outside for majo~ portion of time in inclemen~ ~eather; preEerably comple~ion of rela~ed ~echnical couraes and willingness to participate in H.T.~o and exCe=nal courses az required ~o update technical ~valificationz. ~us~ have ezpe~ience az a quaiified land~cap~ worker, ~SA line clearing and hydraulic aerial · 6. Cl~ allocaci~ (continued) e. genera! ,landscaPtr~ etc.~ ~ hig~y righC~f~ay ~ oC~c mini~c~ pco~ ~ ~c~ll~ ~c~om a.v~iec~ o~ ralac~ ~ores~ ~ ~ ~ vaci~ pro~. ~ p~e a v~iecy oE celac~ ~e~ UIGHW&¥ GENERAL FOP.~LAH/WCP.~24 c~ by ~4y l~u~ cons~c~ion c:evs, P~o~eccs adsiq~ 4re ex~cC~ c~ be compIeced without e~ce ~o s~:vxsot., ~eM esC~Ce ~d artifice T~.e7 check c~e :ec~ds and prega:e ~e~rcs on rock p~ot~ss, 'expenditures, ~'t~AC~i O~OCAOm cOSCl and macerzalrusaq~. AS a :~ne ~a;~.c;~g ~ema~,'~cme~ :;~e7 su~eZ'/~se the ~Gtk o~ e~;~:~.ees . ~a~C~n~ ~d decide on ~e c7~ of ma~k~q according ~o ~i~isC~7 standards; ~:ec% ~evs Lfl ceGa~A~ o~ ~arkAflgs, e,~. c~oSS :~ch:ng, icc., ensuFe daAly clfafli~q 4Ad maiflceflaflce o~ ~ & vat,icy of a~icvlcu~iI ~asks such as L. ~le~nca:y sc~ ~6cion. M AINT~'-NANC E FOREMAN C LASS DIE~'iNiTION: This class covers positions where the employee is a sktlle~ or qualified Maintenance ~echanic, supervisin~ at least two e~ployees the Journeyman level in ~e ~erfor~ance of a w~de varietF of skilled main- tenance tasks ~ a ~overnment building, institution, field station, or other establishment, including associated ~quipm~nt a~ s~rvie~$ or in ~ field. The employee in ~ese positions usually reports to ~e official in charge of maintenance ~nd i$ res~0nsible for ~e discipline and general conduct of the employees under his supervision as we~l as for ~e a~equac~ cf ~eir work. They instruct, guide, check ~d inspect ~e work performed by their subordinates; ~$Sist ~e ~$killed or se~-sk~le~ ~ ~erstand ment$ of ~e tasks assigned and ~e m~od$ of obtaining acceptable res~ts. They ~ay ~emselve$ perform some of ~e ~aintenance work as requi=ed al~ough in some ~sition$ most of the work involves ~e supervision large group of ~intenance staff including skilled tradesmen Mechanics. They ~y, ~ addition, supervise patient, residen~ trainee inmate helpers, Ina few ~osition$ ~e ~rk ~F involve some des'ign and development wark or ~' consist of specialized work such as the construc~ tion of publicit~ displ*ys. - OUA~IFICATIONSI Elementary school education wi~ a $o~ knowled2e of hand tools and power equipment. Acceptable e~efie~ce in general maintenance work iacluding carpentry, pluming, gla=ing, weldin~, etc. Su~erviso~ ability; ability to lay out and organize work from ~derately complicated blueprint~ a~ specifications; ~bility perform a v~riety of mainte~nce ta=k~; tact; good judgement; good physical condition. ) Revised, Sanuar¥ 1967