HomeMy WebLinkAboutBenn 97-12-12 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN:
SHERIDAN COLLEGE
- and -
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
LOCAL 245
CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCES OF BENN AND MACPHERSON
JANE H. DEVLIN SOLE ARBITRATOR
APPEARANCES FOR THE COLLEGE:
ROSALIE SPARGO
BRIAN SCANNELL
APPEARANCES FOR THE UNION:
NORMA PENNINGTON-DRABBLE
JAY JACKSON
JOE BENN
WAYNE MACPHERSON
OPSEU FILE NOS.: 97D772 & 97A017
HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 1997
The Grievors, Joe Benn and Wayne MacPherson, are presently
classified as General Maintenance Workers, Atypical at payband 6 and seek
reclassification as General Maintenance Workers at payband 7.
The parties agreed on the content of the P.D.F. which is applicable
to both of the Grievers. They also agreed on the rating in the majority of factors,
although they were unable to agree on the rating in the following factors:
Factor College Rating Union Rating
Sensory Demand 2 3
Strain from Work
Pressures/Demands/
Deadlines 2 3
Responsibility for
Decisions/Actions 2 3
It was the submission of the Union that the duties and responsibilities
of the Grievers are accurately set out in the guide chart for the classification of
General Maintenance Worker and, accordingly, there is no necessity for core
point rating. The Union further maintained that even if the position were to be
core point rated, there is no basis to depart from the ratings for General
2
Maintenance Worker. It was the submission of the College that although the
Grievers perform some duties of the General Maintenance Worker classification,
they also perform duties which are characteristic of a Caretaker B at payband 4.
To this extent, it was submitted that their position is atypical and that in respect of
the disputed factors, a lower rating is warranted.
The Grievors perform maintenance work at the Davis Campus which
is comprised of 105 acres with 6 parking lots, a bus loop and a detached day
care centre. 90% of their work is performed outdoors and the remaining 10%,
indoors. Functional direction is provided by a Support Services Officer and a
Lead Hand, both of whom are members of the bargaining unit. The Grievers'
immediate Supervisor is Brian Scannell, Manager of Engineering and
Maintenance, who works at the Trafalgar Road Campus and visits the Davis
campus from time to time. Also assigned to the Physical Resources Department
at the Davis campus are an Electrician, a Stationary Engineer and a General
Maintenance Worker at payband 7.
As indicated on the P.D.F., the Grievors perform work in 5 general
areas consisting of grounds maintenance; external general maintenance;
equipment maintenance and repair; snow and ice removal; and miscellaneous
duties. In the course of their work, the Grievers operate various types of
equipment, including dump trucks, tractors, snow plows, push mowers and a front
end loader.
As to grounds maintenance, the Grievors are involved in cutting
grass, aerifying soil and planting, pruning and trimming trees and shrubs. They
are also involved in weed control and the application of fertilizer, herbicides and
pesticides. As to external general maintenance, the Grievers pick up and remove
refuse and debris, repair exterior furniture such a picnic tables and benches as
well as signs, fences and posts. On one occasion, they were required to relocate
fencing around a compound which involved dismantling the fence, including
stakes; transporting it to another area of the campus, and reinstalling it, which
included remounting a fairly large gate. This work was performed over a period
of three weekends. The Grievers also make minor asphalt repairs to parking lots
and roadways.
As to equipment repair and maintenance, the Grievors carry out
maintenance on grounds equipment such as painting, blade sharpening, changing
oil and spark plugs and testing belts on mowers. As well, they detect and identify
mechanical problems and, if possible, effect necessary repairs to keep the
equipment in operation.
4
The Grievors also operate equipment to remove snow and ice from
parking lots, walkways and entrance ways; apply sand and salt; and clear
blocked drains. The evidence indicates that during the winter months, the
Grievers are on call as snow and ice removal takes priority over other duties so
that the campus remains accessible to students, staff and members of the public.
In addition, the Grievors perform miscellaneous duties, including
moving furniture and transporting equipment and materials between campuses.
They also maintain indoor plants, which includes watering, trimming and applying
fertilizer, and they take cuttings from existing plants which they transplant for
indoor use. As well, the Grievers prepare the grounds for convocation and
special events and assist with other maintenance functions.
Prior to considering the factors in dispute, it is necessary to make
certain general observations. Firstly, it is apparent that the classification of
General Maintenance Worker applies equally to employees who predominantly
work indoors as well as to those who work outdoors. Moreover, although the
College maintained that the Grievers perform certain duties which are
characteristic of a Caretaker B, there is, of course, some overlap in job functions
and, by way of example, operating snow plows and related equipment appears on
the guide charts for both the General Maintenance Worker and the Caretaker B
classifications. However, the College determined that the Grievers' position
appropriately belongs to the General Maintenance Worker job family and, in
respect of the majority of factors, including factors such as training/technical
skills, experience, complexity and judgement, the parties agreed to ratings
applicable to the General Maintenance Worker classification. Moreover, I note
that there is a significant correlation between the typical duties of the General
Maintenance Worker as set out on the guide chart and those performed by the
Grievers. In these circumstances, therefore, it must be clearly demonstrated that
a departure from the ratings applicable to the General Maintenance Worker
classification is warranted.
Furthermore, although the College maintained that employees
classified as General Maintenance Workers at payband 7 perform semi-skilled
work in one of a number of skilled trades such as carpenter, plumber or
electrician, it is to be noted that the skilled trades also include painter and
nurseryman-landscaper.
In this case, in addition to equipment repair and maintenance, which
is admittedly semi-skilled work, the Grievers also perform some painting and
carpentry work. Moreover, the P.D.F. indicates that they assist the Supervisor in
diagnosing and treating diseased and/or infected turf, trees and shrubs. They
must also be knowledgeable in tree/shrub trimming techniques; turf maintenance
(including fertilizing, aerifying and irrigating) and the care of exterior and interior
plants.
I turn, then, to the factors in dispute:
1. Sensory Demand
This factor measures the demand on mental energy and, in
particular, the level of concentration required to perform tasks as well as the
frequency of the requirement for careful attention to detail.
Given the various job duties performed by the Grievors, including
equipment repair and maintenance, painting, repairs to furniture, signs, fences,
etc. as well as the operation of grounds equipment and, particularly, snow plows
in the vicinity of students, staff and members of the public, I find that in this factor,
the Grievors' position is appropriately rated at level 3.
2. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines
As indicated previously, during the winter months, the Grievors are
on call to perform duties relating to snow and ice removal. As well, they are
interrupted from assigned duties to perform other tasks requiring a change in
work priorities although it would appear that interruptions are usually predictable.
While the rating in this factor is close to the line, in the circumstances, I am not
persuaded that a departure from the rating for General Maintenance Worker is
warranted.
3. Responsibility for Decisions/Actions
The P.D.F. indicates that if the Grievors do not complete work
assignments as scheduled, many people may be affected. Moreover, it has not
been demonstrated that the impact of the Grievers' decisions or actions is less
than that of other General Maintenance Workers, particularly as the Grievers
perform a substantial number of the typical duties of the position. Accordingly,
once again, I am not persuaded that there is an appropriate basis to depart from
the rating for General Maintenance Worker.
$
In the result, in respect of the factors in dispute, I find that the
Grievors' position is appropriately rated as follows:
Factor Rating
Sensory Demand 3
Strain from Work
Pressures/Demands/
Deadlines 3
Responsibility for
Decisions/Actions 3
Based upon these ratings, the total points for the Grievors' position
increase from 415 to 457 with the result that the position falls into payband 7. I
remit the matter of compensation to the parties and remain seized to deal with
this issue as well as for purposes of implementation of this award.
DATED AT TORONTO, this 12th day of December, 1997.
Sole Arbitrator