HomeMy WebLinkAboutRancourt 92-00-00 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
between
CAMBRIAN COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY
(hereinafter referred to as the College)
and
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
(hereinafter referred to as the union)
Classification Grievance of J. Rancourt
Sole Arbitrator: G. J. Brandt
Appearances:
For the College: Susan Pratt, Staff Relations Officer
Chris Bartlett
For the Union: N.A. Luczay, Grievance Officer
J. Rancourt
Hearing:
Sudbury, Ont.
October 15, 1992
AWARD
1. Introduction
The grievor, Julie Rancourt, is currently classified as a
Library Technician A/Payband 7. In this grievance she seeks re-
classification as Library Technician B/Payband 9.
This case presents both procedural and substantive issues
which, in the experience of this arbitrator, are novel. First,
the parties disagreed over the proper forum in which the dispute
should be resolved, i.e. by expedited arbitration or by reference
to a full board. Secondly, the approach taken by the union did
not require an application of the Core Point Rating Plan.
Rather, it focused entirely on the Classification Guide Charts.
That altered both the nature of the hearing and the nature of the
order I find I am able to make.
The procedural issue arose out of a difference between the
parties as to whether or not the issues that divided them were
appropriate for expedited arbitration. Initially the College
sought the agreement of the Union local to having the grievance
referred to a full board of arbitration since, in its view, there
were issues of credibility and disagreements over the contents of
the PDF which could not be resolved by the expedited process.
The union took the position that the matter could be resolved by
expedited arbitration.
When the matter was assigned to me the College made written
submissions asking me to direct that the matter be referred to a
full board. As the union remained of the view that the grievance
could be heard by me sitting alone as an expedited arbitrator, I
took the position that, unless and until I heard the evidence I
was in no position to rule on the College's request.
Consequently, I directed the parties to process the grievance in
the expedited fashion and indicated that at the conclusion of the
hearing I would entertain submissions as to whether, having
regard to what transpired at the hearing, a reference to a full
board would be necessary. It was further indicated that, in the
event that I were to rule that the matter was properly before me
as an expedited arbitrator, I would then invite submissions on
the merits of the case without reconvening the hearing to hear
further evidence.
While this manner of proceeding presented the risk that the
case on the merits might be heard twice I was of the view that it
was the best way of preserving the integrity of the preferred
arbitral route, viz, expedited arbitration. The alternative of
accepting at face value a claim by either party that a dispute
ought to be referred to a full board would mean that either party
could easily subvert the negotiated expedited process by the
simple assertion that the nature of the dispute demanded a
reference to a full board. Ideally, the parties should be able
to agree on the proper forum for arbitration. However, where (as
here) they did not agree, it became necessary to proceed in a
fashion which reflected the wish of the parties that, wherever
possible, these disputes are to be resolved by expedited
arbitration.
Consequently, at a hearing held on October 15, 1992,
evidence was heard and, following the conclusion of the evidence,
the parties were directed to provide written submissions on the
issue as to whether, having regard to the evidence adduced, the
issue should be referred to a full board. Each of the parties
maintained their respective positions taken prior to the
hearings. The College argued that I should refer the issue to a
full board; the union requested me to rule on the merits.
Upon receipt of those submissions I ruled that the matter
was properly before me as an expedited arbitrator. That ruling
was contained in a letter the substance of which is incorporated
herein and made a part of this award. The following is the
relevant portion of that letter.
In reaching that conclusion [vis that the grievance is
properly before me as an expedited arbitrator] I note that the
parties to the collective agreement have expressed a preference
for having classification disputes resolved by an expedited
hearing. Therefore, there is an onus on the party seeking a
referral to a full board to establish that the case is not
suitable for resolution on an expedited basis. Care must be
taken that grievances not be too quickly referred to a full
board. Otherwise there is a risk that the preferred process,
negotiated by the parties, may be undermined.
While ideally the expedited process would work best if there
was full agreement on the PDF. However, disagreement over the
PDF is not, of itself, sufficient to warrant a referral to a full
Board. That is made clear by the collective agreement.
Article 18.4 of the agreement establishes two ways in which
unresolved grievances can be referred to expedited arbitration.
A grievance can be referred directly to arbitration after Step 1
if there is agreement concerning the PDF. Where there is not
agreement concerning the PDF and the grievance has not been
resolved then it must be referred to Step II, that is, to the
President of the College who, after a meeting convened to discuss
the grievance, is obliged to give a decision on the grievance.
Where the matter is not resolved after Step II it may be referred
directly to a single arbitrator for expedited arbitration.
Thus, any referrals following Step II must, of necessity,
involve unresolved complaints in which there is a disagreement
about the PDF.
The College maintains that there are credibility issues that
require that the grievance be referred to a full board. I am not
persuaded that this is necessarily the case. In this regard I
note that counsel for the College chose not to ask any questions
of the grievor following the tendering of her evidence. That is
normally the manner by which credibility is tested. I appreciate
that, in negotiating the expedited process, the parties wanted
the process to remain informal and not to be characterized by the
kind of aggressive "cross-examination" that might be used in the
event of a credibility issue. But that preference for avoiding
cross-examination must be looked at reasonably and does not
justify a party in choosing not to ask any questions at all and
then arguing that there is a credibility issue that requires
reference to a full board.
In saying this I do not wish to be understood necessarily to
be accepting the evidence offered as credible in all its
respects. I merely state that, for the purposes of resolving
this preliminary issue, credibility is not a bar to my hearing
the case. Whether and to what extent that evidence is found
credible will depend on my own assessment of it based on
submissions made on the merits.
Upon issuance of this ruling I directed the parties to
submit written argument on the merits of the case. As that
argument has now been received I am able to deal with the case on
its merits.
As indicated above the parties disagree in certain respects
on the content of the Position Description Form, particularly in
respect of the description of the Duties and Responsibilities.
The PDF filed by the College summarizes the position as
follows:
Incumbent maintains the periodical collection: She provides
direction and assistance to the students using the various
indexes and helps them use the collection in a systematic
and comprehensive way.
The following are the principal Duties and Responsibilities
of the position which occupy the grievor individually for at
least 10% of her time and, in the aggregate, for 80% of her time.
1. Assists patrons using the periodical collection.
Instructs students on the proper use of indexes and directs them
to appropriate publications that are not indexed based on
personal knowledge of the periodical holdings. 25%
2. Maintains periodicals budget using Lotus 123. This
includes tracking and entering subscription renewals, new orders,
cancellations, credits and adjustments for all serials ordered by
the LRC. 25%
3. Sorts and checks mail. Routes to appropriate personnel.
Checks periodical/serials in one (sic) the Kardex and affixes
stamps and tattle-tapes before shelving. 10%
4. Scans periodicals for content and for information that
could be used in the vertical file, be of interest to staff 10%
5. Provides reference service at the general information
desk on a regular evening schedule and as required during staff
absences. 10%
It is the position of the union that the duties and
responsibilities performed by the grievor also include those
duties which the Guide Charts list as the duties performed by a
Library Technician B.
They are:
1. Undertakes the original cataloguing under the direction
of a librarian.
2. Recommends and implements changes in library procedures.
3. Organizes library file, collections and storage
facilities.
4. Assists in establishing independent learning packages.
5. Recommends the selection of library materials.
6. Provides reference information to library users that
requires a more detailed search.
The union further maintains that once it is found that the
grievor does perform these additional duties she must be
classified as a Library Technician B, that there is no need to
have recourse to the Core Point Rating Plan and assign points
based on the various factors set out therein.
The union is correct in its assessment of the process by
which evaluation and classification is to be done under the plan
in effect for the parties. Part II of the Plan sets out the
steps that are to be followed. Paragraph 4 states that once the
Position Description Form is completed and the appropriate Job
Family determined the normal duties and responsibilities of the
position are compared to the Classification levels described in
the Job Evaluation Guide Charts negotiated by the parties and
matched with the guide chart level which most accurately
describes the actual content and responsibilities of the
position. Paragraph 6 speaks of a "relatively small number of
truly atypical positions" that encompass duties and
responsibilities not adequately covered by the existing Job
Family Definitions and the Job Evaluation Guide charts. They are
to be evaluated by the Core Point Rating Plan.
It must also be noted that, in identifying the duties and
responsibilities of the position, it is important to focus on the
core duties and responsibilities. This is made clear from Part
III of the Plan in which guidance is offered when filling out the
Position Description Form, the source document from which the
process begins. Part B of the PDF, Duties and Responsibilities,
requires that the "significant duties and responsibilities"
associated with the position be included along with an estimate
of the approximate percentage of the time required on an annual
basis for each duty. If job evaluation is to produce some degree
of pay equity across the work force care must be taken to avoid
having the classification decision controlled and determined by
occasionally performed functions which, however much they might
be or resemble the duties of a higher paid classifications, are
nevertheless not the normal, core functions of the position in
question.
2. Evidence
I begin with a review of the evidence with a view to
determining whether or not the union has established that the
typical duties of the grievor include the performance of those
duties and responsibilities which, according to the
Classification Guide Charts, would demand a classification of the
position as Library Technician B.
1. Provides reference information to library users that
requires a more detailed search.
As indicated above approximately a quarter of the grievor's
time is spent on assisting patrons use the periodicals section of
the Learning Resource Centre. The periodicals section houses
periodicals, magazines, newspapers, and government publications.
In terms of subject content they tend to focus on practical
rather than theoretical subjects, on the practical applications
of theory learned by students in other courses. Approximately
950 such publications are subscribed to by the College.
Approximately one third of the collection is indexed in 15
separate indexes. The grievor is required to instruct students
on the use of the indexes and also to be able to direct them to
publications that are not indexed. This requires that she retain
a familiarity with the contents of the unindexed publications
going back as far as 10 years. Older publications are kept in a
separate storage area in a different area of the Learning
Resource Centre.
The grievor stated that providing reference assistance
concerning periodicals is different and, in certain respects,
more difficult than for books. She claimed that, while
information concerning publisher, date, title and author do not
change with respect to books, periodicals and magazines are
constantly changing their names and subject content.
The grievor is generally not the first person to be
contacted with a reference related question. She works in the
periodicals section which is located in a corner of the Learning
Resource Centre. Patrons or students entering the centre must
first pass by the Circulation Desk where, typically, the initial
reference information would be sought and provided. The employee
who works at the main reference desk, who is classified as a
Library Technician B, is expected to have a thorough knowledge of
all of the collection, including the periodical collection and is
able to provide students with reference information concerning
periodicals. Or the student may be directed to the grievor for
reference information of a more specific kind. Students who come
to the grievor are asked what they are looking for and are
assisted by referring them to indexes or are directed in some
other fashion.
The students at the College (approximately 1,700 in number)
are given 2 hours of instruction in the use of the Learning
Resource Centre including the periodicals section. Included in
that instruction is a videotape presentation that shows
specifically how the periodical index works. In addition to that
the Library Technician B develops learning packages for student
use.
The periodicals collection is not used as much as the book
collection. Statistics respecting the numbers of times that
books or periodicals were signed out for use either in or outside
the Centre indicate that books were used approximately 3 times as
often as periodicals. (26,000 v. 9,483).
As part of her duties (10%) the grievor is also required to
provide a reference service at the general information desk one
evening per week and during staff absences. She estimated that
in 1991 she was required to fill in for absent staff on
approximately 6 occasions. She stated that when she works on the
main reference desk she is expected to be able to deal with all
types of requests, that is requests for information concerning
both books and periodicals. Mr. Bartlett stated, however, that
as the College does not provide full service in the evenings (the
grievor being the only person on staff), there are relatively few
requests for reference information at that time.
2. Undertakes original cataloguing under direction of Librarian
The grievor testified that she does some cataloguing work in
connection with her position on the selection committee that
deals with requests for new periodical acquisitions. The work
that she described as "cataloguing" occurs in the course of
completing certain paper work associated with the acquisition of
new periodicals. This requires her, in the preparation of the
order forms, in the preparation of the Kardex, and in the
assignment of the newly acquired work to the periodicals list, to
assign a subject heading to the particular work. She does this
by consulting the Library of Congress subject headings for
English language publications as well as a French language
equivalent for publications in French. Some measure of the
frequency of this activity may be found in the evidence of Mr.
Bartlett, who stated that in 1990-91 the selection committee
acquired 14 new periodicals. In that same year there were some
900 new book acquisitions.
The grievor testified that she also gave Library of Congress
subject headings to books that were acquired from donations
(rather than purchased through the selection committee) and to
government publications that arrive in the library at various
times of the year. She stated that 143 of the 979 periodicals
are government publications and that 71 of these had bi-lingual
titles thereby requiring the assignment of a subject heading in
both English and in French.
The College does not deny that the grievor carries out these
tasks. However, it claims that they cannot be described as
cataloguing, let alone "original" cataloguing. Mr. Bartlett,
although not himself a librarian, stated that "cataloguing",
although it included the use of Library of Congress subject
headings, involved the use of much more information than that.
That view is reflected in the College PDF which lists as one of
the duties and responsibilities, "updates the periodical list
assigning subject headings using the Library of Congress Subject
Headings."
3. Assists in establishing Independent Learning Packages
The grievor stated that since the subjects and topics in
periodicals are constantly changing, and since only few of the
indexes use the Library of Congress headings, it is necessary
twice a year to update the indexes to reflect these subject
changes. The grievor stated that, although the Technician B
actually prepares the package of changes that covers the whole
library, she [the grievor] tells her what changes should go in
from the periodicals section. She also testified as to other
kinds of general orientation packages including a map of the
library and a section on how to use the periodical index to find
a periodical which are revised every year and in which changes
are made on her recommendation.
One example of what the grievor described as an Independent
Learning Package was put in evidence. It was an exercise
designed to teach students how to research material on the
subject of Midwives. It suggested a number of areas where
students might look. (eg. encyclopedias, Videotapes, Mandarin on
line catalogue). One part listed useful periodical indexes and
made suggestions as to which subjects headings students should
research in those indices. It was her evidence that she
contributed the information respecting the periodical searches.
4. Recommends the selection of library materials
There is no dispute that the grievor does perform this
function. However, there is a dispute as to the frequency with
which it is performed. The grievor disputed the estimation in
the PDF that she does this only 1% of the time. She stated that
each periodical or magazine received each day (approximately 30
per day) is reviewed to determine whether or not a newly
advertised book, periodical, serial, or newspaper should be
recommended for purchase. She estimated that, from the 30
periodicals reviewed per day, she would recommend 5-6 new items
for purchase. That would suggest that, in the course of a
working year of say 200 working days, the grievor herself would
recommend the purchase of approximately 1000 new items.
That estimate is in sharp conflict with the evidence of Mr.
Bartlett. He stated that 14 new periodicals were bought in 1990
and that the selection committee may have considered twice as
many recommendations but never more than one hundred
recommendations in a year. It should be noted, however, that the
grievor's estimate includes books, of which there were 900 new
purchases in 1990 some of which were a result of recommendations
from the grievor. It is not known how many book recommendations
were made by the grievor. It should be noted, however, that all
faculty are encouraged to recommend new book acquisitions and it
is likely that a good number of them would have come from other
faculty.
5. Recommends and implements changes in library procedures.
The evidence with respect to this matter involves certain
changes in the method by which budget information was organized
and collected. The PDF indicates that the grievor spends
approximately a quarter of her time maintaining the periodicals
budget using Lotus 123. This function includes tracking and
entering subscription renewals, new orders, cancellations, and
credits and adjustments. This function was performed manually at
one time by a Clerk General. At some point the College decided
to computerize their records management system and Lotus 123 was
introduced while at the same time retaining the manual system.
When the grievor assumed responsibility for this function
she considered that the two systems were unnecessary and
suggested that the College go over to the one system. This
required that all of the data the had been collected manually be
integrated into the computerized data base.
6. Organizes library file, collections and storage
facilities
No evidence was adduced at the hearing with respect to this
particular function.
3. Conclusions
It is my conclusion that the union has not met the onus of
establishing that the duties and responsibilities of the grievor
fall within those listed in the Guide Classification Charts as
the Typical Duties of a Library Technician B.
1. Reference functions
Although the grievor does provide some reference information
to users the evidence does not indicate it to be the kind of
information that requires a "detailed search". The kind of
material collected in the periodicals selection of the LRC is
generally of a simpler, non-theoretical variety designed to
reveal the practical application of theory. Further, it must be
noted that students will have had some assistance in the use of
research tools before approaching the grievor for assistance.
They obtain some general tuition and orientation in the use of
the library. Moreover, the first request for reference
information is sought from the Circulation Librarian, who must be
familiar with both the books and periodical collection. It is
there that the student will obtain a good deal of the information
sought, including information respecting periodical holdings.
In my opinion the kind of information provided by the
grievor in response to a reference question is more appropriately
described by the phrase "answers ready reference questions", a
Library Technician A function. The evidence suggests that what
the grievor does is to direct, either through the indexes
available or because of her knowledge of the contents of that
part of the periodical collection, users to certain periodicals
that may contain information that will be of value. It does not
suggest that she herself is involved in a "detailed search" for
information.
When the grievor is working at the main circulation desk she
would, of course, be expected to provide the same kind of
reference information as would be demanded of the regular
incumbent in that position who is, as noted, classified as a
Library Technician B. However, it should be noted that the
grievor served in this capacity only one evening per week and on
"fill-in" basis (6 times in 1991). Further, the evidence is that
the library is not busy in the evening. Therefore, to the extent
that this function is performed, it is done on a relatively
infrequent basis.
2. Original Cataloguing functions.
I cannot accept that the assignment of established Library
of Congress subject headings to newly acquired periodicals,
without more, can be meaningfully described as "original
cataloguing". There is some dispute between the parties as to
what is meant by "cataloguing" Mr. Bartlett stated that it
involved more than simply doing what the grievor is acknowledged
by the College to have done. Although Mr. Bartlett is not a
professional librarian his is the only evidence that I have on
the definitional question as to what is and what is not
"original" cataloguing. No evidence as to the meaning of this
term was offered by the union. Although she described what she
did as "cataloguing" her own lack of professional qualifications
as a librarian would equally suggest that little reliance should
be placed on her evidence as to what constitutes "original
cataloguing." In the circumstances I have little choice but to
reject the claim of the union as it is unsupported by any
reliable evidence.
3. Independent Learning Packages.
The evidence indicates that the grievor has some
responsibility in connection with the development of some
materials which would be of assistance to users of the Library.
By way of example she had some input into the assignment on
researching material on Midwives in so far as it applied to
periodical holdings. Apart from a denial that this work would
qualify as a "learning package", the College offered no
significant evidence that would help me to understand what
constitutes a learning package. In the circumstances I must
conclude that the grievor does perform these functions although I
have substantial doubts as to the extent to which it can be said
that they constitute a part of her "core duties".
4. Recommendation of selection of new materials
There is no dispute in the evidence that the grievor does
have some involvement in performing this function. As a member
of the selection committee for periodicals she is directly
engaged in making recommendations that may or may not be
approved. However, care must be taken not to give this function
more significance than it deserves. The grievor testified that,
in 1990-91 she made 1000 recommendations for purchase of books
and periodicals. Although it is not entirely clear from the
evidence it would appear that the grievor's estimate included
both books and periodicals.
However, it is my view that any role played in connection
with the "recommendation" of the purchase of books should be
substantially discounted. Employees generally at the College are
encouraged to make suggestions with respect to the acquisition of
new materials for the Library. I find it difficult to consider
this particular function, insofar as it relates to new book
acquisitions, to be particularly relevant as far as the grievor
is concerned. As her knowledge of the holdings in the book
collection is necessarily limited her "recommendations" in that
regard would be somewhat uninformed.
I consider her membership on the selection committee for the
acquisition of periodicals to be far more significant. However,
according to Mr. Bartlett the committee would never consider more
than 100 periodical recommendations per year. He further stated
that the College only purchased 14 new periodicals in 1990-91.
Thus, while the grievor does perform this function to some
extent, it cannot be said to be a major part of her duties.
5. Recommending and implementing changes in library
procedures.
I do not accept that the grievor's involvement in the
integration of the manual data base into the computerized record
keeping system qualifies under this heading. It would appear
that the relevant "change" in library procedures was the change
from a manual system to a computerized system. That was not a
change that was recommended by the grievor. When the grievor
assumed these duties the computerized system was already in
place. What she did was suggest that the existing manual system,
that the College had been operating contemporaneously with the
new computerized system be abandoned and that the data from it be
integrated into the new system; that is that the College
terminate its practice of running the two systems together.
In my view that is more in the nature of a natural
consequence that flowed inevitably out of the decision to move to
a computerized system. While admittedly it was borne out of a
suggestion that emananted from the grievor I cannot see it as
having the degree of significance and importance that attaches
to, for example, the original decision to change from a manual to
a computerized system.
Moreover, this "recommendation" if it be such, is the only
example offered of this function. Evidently, it was a once only
event. As such it cannot be said to qualify as a "typical" duty
of the grievor.
6. Organizing library file, collections and storage
facilities.
As noted there is no evidence that the grievor is involved
in these functions to any significant degree.
Thus, on balance, the evidence does not establish that the
"typical" duties of the grievor include those listed in the Guide
Classification Charts for the Library Technician B. Although
they bear some resemblance to those duties in some limited
respects the duties as a whole are better captured by the
description of the typical duties of a Library Technician A.
Certainly it cannot be said that the core duties of the grievor
are those set out for the Library Technician B.
The union has taken the position throughout these
proceedings that the grievance ought to succeed on a
straightforward application of the Classification Guide Charts.
Although the union rated the various job factors set out in the
Job Evaluation plan it did not, either at the hearing or in
written submissions in chief, argue that the grievor was
performing a set of duties which made her job atypical thereby
justifying recourse to the Core Point Rating Plan. The only
significant reference to the issue of ratings under the Core
Point Rating Plan is to be found in the union's written reply to
that part of the written submissions of the College that
addressed this issue.
In the circumstances I do not consider it necessary to
assess the evidence in terms of the Core Point Rating Plan. Nor
am I able to complete the Arbitration Data sheet. Although the
grievance is dismissed it does not necessarily follow that the
rating of the factors by the College is accurate. Consequently,
it would be inappropriate for me simply to confirm those ratings
for they have not been put to the test. While this may be an
unsatisfactory result I believe that, given the approach taken by
the union in this case, I have little choice in the matter.
In the result the grievance is dismissed.
Dated at LONDON, Ont. this day of , 1993
G. J. Brandt, Arbitrator