HomeMy WebLinkAboutVisschedyk 05-10-01 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN:
SHERIDAN COLLEGE
- and -
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF LIZ VISSCHEDYK
JANE H. DEVLIN SOLE ARBITRATOR
APPEARANCES FOR THE COLLEGE:
ROBIN WHITELOCK
SUSANNE WODAR
CHRISTINE DYSON
APPEARANCES FOR THE UNION:
NORMA PENNINGTON-DRABBLE
JAY JACKSON
LIZ VlSSCHEDYK
OPSEU FILE NO.: 00B131
HEARING DATE: APRIL 12, 2001
In this case the Grievor, Liz Visschedyk, claims that she is improperly
classified as a Clerk General C at payband 6, and seeks reclassification to Clerk
General Atypical at payband 10.
The parties were unable to agree on the content of the PDF. There was
also disagreement as to which PDF ought to be used for purposes of the arbitration
hearing. In this regard, it would appear that the Union requested certain changes to the
PDF in effect when the grievance was filed in the spring of 1999. The College then
made certain amendments to the PDF which, it suggested, incorporated some of the
changes requested by the Union and proposed that the amended PDF be used for
purposes of the hearing. The Union contended, however, that this latter PDF did not
reflect changes it had requested but instead, represented an attempt on the part of the
College to downgrade the Grievor's position. Accordingly, the Union proposed that the
PDF in effect at the date of the grievance be used for purposes of the hearing.
Following the parties' submissions, I ruled that the hearing would proceed
based on the PDF in effect when the grievance was filed. There was clearly a dispute
between the parties as to whether the amended PDF reflected changes requested by
the Union and, in my view, the appropriate course was to proceed based on the PDF
which gave rise to the grievance. However, I advised the parties that it would be open
to the College to take the position that the amended PDF accurately reflected the duties
and responsibilities of the job.
2
The factors in dispute between the parties are as follows:
Factors Colle.qe Ratin.q Union Ratin.q
Complexity 3 4
Judgement 3 4
Motor Skills C3 D3
Physical Demand 2 4
Sensory Demand 3 5
Strain from Work
Pressures/Demands/Deadlines 3 4
Independent Action 3 4
Communication/Contacts 2 4
Responsibility for
Decisions/Actions 3 5
The Grievor's position entails responsibility for day-to-day monitoring of
the Career Centre at the Trafalgar Road campus, which is used by approximately 700
students on a weekly basis. Her duties include assisting students, staff and tutors by
responding to inquiries and referring students to the appropriate Career Centre or
Student Affairs resource. She also assists students and staff with technical equipment,
including computers, troubleshoots basic hardware and software problems and
monitors equipment and resource usage. As well, the Grievor schedules student/tutor
appointments and assists with overall scheduling at the Centre. In the absence of staff
she assists students with on-line services, completes bi-monthly checks of web linkages
3
and reports problems to the counsellor. She also provides information and orientation
to co-op and work study students assigned to the Centre, which may include
demonstrating hardware or software and outlining procedures to be followed. In
addition, the Grievor may assign work to these students when they are not involved in
tutoring and she provides input into the evaluation of co-op students. She also provides
clerical support to the Co-ordinator/Project Manager, which includes compiling reports
dealing with matters such as Centre usage. As well, she prepares signage and flyers,
maintains inventory, and purchases materials. Although at one time the Grievor also
hired work study students, it would appear that some time prior to the filing of the
grievance, she was advised that this task was not part of her job duties.
As to the changes to the position summary portion of the PDF requested
by the Union, the summary shall be amended to make reference to troubleshooting and
"demonstrating" computer hardware/software and technical equipment... Moreover, I
accept the submission of the College that the statistical reports prepared by the Grievor
are properly characterized as basic and, accordingly, the final sentence of the position
summary shall be amended to refer to ... "tracking", compiling and preparing "basic
statistical" reports on Centre usage, filing, and other activities as required. These
reports shall be described in a similar manner elsewhere in the PDF. Furthermore, if
reference is to be made to the demonstration of on-line services, the position summary
should indicate that this function is performed in the absence of staff.
4
With respect to the duties and responsibilities listed on page 2 of the PDF,
there was a dispute between the parties regarding the percentages of time which the
Griever spends performing certain job duties. Disputes of this nature are particularly
difficult to resolve as percentages are approximate and necessarily based on estimates
about which there may be genuine differences of opinion. In any event, having
considered the evidence and submissions of the parties, I direct that the initial
paragraph be amended to indicate that the duties described in the first sentence
account for approximately 40% of the Griever's time. This sentence shall also include
reference to frentline interaction with "alumni" and "employers". The balance of the first
paragraph shall then be included in paragraph 4 which shall be amended to provide as
follows:
4. Maintain environment in Centre i.e. troubleshooting basic computer,
technical and software problems, and monitoring student/staff computer,
equipment and resource usage. This also includes
assisting/demonstrating on-line services (i.e. Werklink and Career Centre
website to students and staff when staff is unavailable in Centre. Assist
and demonstrate to students/staff basic computer, technical, and audio
visual equipment. As an information resource, incumbent must be aware
of internal divisional software programs, i.e. Werklink. Completes bi-
weekly checks of web linkages and reports problems to Counsellor.
The PDF should indicate that these duties account for approximately 33% of the
Griever's time.
Complexity
In this section of the PDF, the fourth line of the paragraph shall be
amended to include reference to "demonstrating" as well as troubleshooting for
students and staff... The College also agreed to include the following sentence: "The
incumbent needs to be comfortable with an evolving job structure and be prepared to
participate actively in the planning and shaping of the job and the Centre itself". As
well, the paragraph shall include reference to the incumbent providing Career Centre
information to visitors, students and staff, describing activities, explaining the purpose
of the Centre, hours of operation and information available.
The factor of complexity measures the amount and nature of analysis,
problem solving and reasoning required to perform job duties. The conceptual
demands of the job are characterized by analysis and interpretation required for
problem and solution definition, creativity, mental challenge, degree of job structure,
planning activities and variety and difficulty of tasks. In this case, the parties agreed
that the Grievor's position involves the performance of a variety of complex tasks
involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. They disagree, however,
as to whether these tasks are routine so as to warrant a rating at level 3 as proposed by
the College or whether they are non-routine and, therefore, justify a rating at level 4, as
proposed by the Union.
6
The Grievor's position involves the performance of some tasks which may
be described as routine, such as the provision of general information to students, and
referring them to appropriate resources. Some of the clerical duties performed by the
Griever may also be described as routine and this term would apply equally to some
aspects of the assistance provided to students relating to the operation of equipment
and, in particular, computers. However, there are 25 computers at the Centre for the
use of students with a variety of software programs and, as pointed out by the Griever,
students have varying levels of proficiency in using a computer. Moreover, in my view,
the Griever's duties relating to troubleshooting hardware and software problems cannot
be described routine. I also note that although in some cases, the Griever contacts
Information Technology ("IT"), she testified that at times, she uses the information
obtained to resolve problems which arise in the future. The Griever also assigns work
to work study and ce-ep students when they are not involved in tutoring and provides
input into the evaluation of ce-ep students. Furthermore, the College agreed that the
incumbent must be comfortable with an evolving job structure and be prepared to
actively participate in the planning and shaping of the job and the Centre itself. In the
result, I find that although the Griever performs some routine tasks, she performs non-
routine tasks to a sufficient extent to warrant a rating at level 4.
7
Jud.qement
Paragraph 4.1 of the PDF shall be amended to include reference to the
use of judgement when directing co-op and work study students and when providing
input in the evaluation of co-op students. The second last sentence in the paragraph
shall also be amended to refer to staff, students and "visitors". As to paragraph 4.2,
reference should be made to the fact that some guidelines are developed as the Career
Centre evolves. I am not persuaded that any further amendment of this section of the
PDF is appropriate.
This factor measures the independent judgement and problem-solving
required on the job. It assesses the difficulty in identifying various available choices of
action and in exercising judgement to select the most appropriate action. It also
considers mental processes such as analysis, reasoning or evaluation. In this factor,
the College rated the Grievor's position at level 3 and the Union proposes a rating at
level 4.
The Grievor exercises judgement when responding to inquiries, referring
students to appropriate resources, providing technical support and troubleshooting
basic hardware and software problems. She must also establish priorities as she is
often faced with simultaneous inquiries or concerns by students. As well, she may
identify problems related to services or procedures and recommend a solution or
$
discuss deficiencies with the Project Manager or Co-ordinator. Judgement is also
required when directing co-op and work study students and when providing input into
the evaluation of co-op students. In my view, however, for the most part, the problem-
solving required in the Grievor's position involves the identification and breakdown of
facts and components of the problem situation and the exercise of a moderate degree
of judgement which is consistent with a rating at level 3.
As pointed out by the College, in Sheridan Colle.qe and OPSEU
(grievance of Schuster) December 18, 1996, Arbitrator Springate awarded a rating at
level 4 for a position which involved responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the
Learning Centre at the College's Davis campus. While that position entailed a number
of duties which are similar to those performed by the Grievor in this case, in awarding a
rating at level 4 in the factor of judgement, Arbitrator Springate relied primarily on the
judgement exercised by the incumbent in relation to the peer tutoring program. Among
other matters, the incumbent was involved in recruiting tutors and matching them with
students seeking tutoring, which involved consideration of a variety of factors. The
Grievor does not exercise such responsibilities in this case and, for the reasons set out
above, I find that in the factor of judgement, her position is properly rated at level 3.
9
Motor Skills
Dealing firstly with the PDF, there is a dispute between the parties as to
the amount of time the Griever spends using the computer. Having considered the
matter, I direct that the PDF be amended to reflect use of the computer 50% to 60% of
the time and I see no reason not to accept the Griever's estimate that this time is
divided evenly between keyboarding and mouse usage. Although the Union also
requested that a statement contained in paragraph 7.'1 of the PDF be included in this
section, the statement in question relates to the speed required in resolving computer
problems whereas this factor deals with speed in the context of fine motor movements.
Accordingly, I am not prepared to accede to the Union's request.
This factor measures fine motor movements and takes into account
dexterity, complexity, ce-erdinatien and speed. The dispute between the parties
concerns whether the Griever's position should be rated at level C3, as proposed by the
College, or level D3, as proposed by the Union. In this regard, it was acknowledged
that the Griever's position requires keyboarding at a rate of 45 words per minute. A
similar requirement was considered by Arbitrator Springate in Sheridan Celle.cle and
OPSEU (supra) and he found this standard to be "well below what is generally expected
in situations where speed is essential". On this basis, Arbitrator Springate concluded
that speed was a secondary, rather than a major, consideration and, in my view, a
similar conclusion is warranted in this case. Moreover, it would appear that the
]0
Grievor's position entails complex fine motor movements involving considerable
dexterity, ce-erdinatien and precision and, accordingly, I find that in this factor, her
position is appropriately rated at level C3.
Physical Demand
With respect to the PDF, there was initially some dispute as to the amount
of time the Griever spends walking up and downstairs as there are two sets of stairs at
the Centre, separated by a landing. The Griever uses the stairs to access different
levels of the Centre and when she enters and leaves the Centre. During the hearing, it
was agreed that the Griever spends between 30 and 40 minutes each day walking up
and downstairs and this amount of time should be converted to the appropriate
percentage and included on the PDF. A small percentage of time should also be
included for moving computers and printers when checking monitors and plugs. Other
percentages shall be adjusted accordingly.
As to the rating, this factor measures the demand on physical energy
required to complete tasks. Consideration is given to the type and duration of physical
effort, its frequency and the strain from rapid and repetitive fine muscle movements or
the use of larger muscle groups or lack of flexibility of movement. Although the College
rated the Griever's position at level 2, the Union proposed a rating at level 4.
]]
The Griever works in an office environment and spends the majority of her
time standing, sitting at a workstation performing reception or computer functions and
bending over assisting students at their work stations. For brief periods, she may be in
awkward positions when she is checking monitors or plugs and may be required to
move computers or printers in the course of troubleshooting problems with this
equipment. From time to time, she also moves boxes, tables and chairs and, as
indicated previously, she spends to 30 to 40 minute each day walking up and
downstairs.
In my view, the Grievor's position does not involve frequent physical
demand, which may include a requirement for repetition and speed, or awkward bodily
positions over extended periods of time, nor does it entail continuous moderate physical
effort or recurring heavy physical effort as is required for a rating at level 4. I am also of
the view that the Griever's position cannot be with equated with classifications such as
Skilled Trades Worker or General Maintenance Worker, which are illustrative of the
classifications rated at level 4. Moreover, although the Union submitted that it is
inappropriate to consider such classifications, the job evaluation manual provides that
illustrative classifications are part of the core point rating plan and are to be considered
to ensure consistency in the application of the plan.
In fact, it does not appear that the Grievor's position requires heavy
physical effort as she moves computers or printers on the surface of workstations for
]2
the purpose of checking connections and is not required to lift this equipment. In my
view, duties such as moving boxes, rearranging chairs and tables require moderate
physical effort and even if walking up and downstairs were characterized in a similar
manner, the Griever engages in these activities "occasionally" as, for purposes of this
factor, that term is defined as involving "part of the day". It cannot be said that this level
of physical demand is "recurring" or "continuous" as these terms are defined as
involving "most" of the day and "all of the time", respectively. On this basis, therefore, I
find that the Griever's position is properly rated at level 2.
Sensory Demand
I am not persuaded that any amendment is warranted to this section of
the PDF. As to the rating, this factor measures the demand on mental energy when
performing tasks. Consideration is given to the level or degree of concentration and
frequency of the requirement for careful attention to detail and accuracy. In respect of
this factor, the College rated the Griever's position at level 3 and the Union proposed a
rating at level 5.
Level 5, which is the highest rating in this factor, is appropriate for
positions involving extensive concentration and frequent careful attention to detail.
Illustrative classifications rated at this level are systems analyst and technical support
specialist and, in my view, it cannot be said that the Griever's position entails the same
demand on mental energy. Moreover, while the Griever performs variety of job duties,
some of which may involve different levels of sensory demand, on an overall basis, it
appears to me that her position is more compatible with classifications rated at level 3
than with those rated at level 4. In the result, in the factor of sensory demand, I find
that the Griever's position is appropriately rated at level 3.
Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines
Paragraph 8.1 shall be amended to make reference to multiple demands
of students, tutors and staff. There was also considerable dispute between the parties
regarding both the percentages of time to be attributed to various tasks and the
predictability of the strain. In the result, having considered the evidence, I direct that
the PDF be amended to reflect that multiple demands occur 30 to 40% of the time;
interruptions, 30 to 40% of the time; computer, technical software problems, 40% of the
time; and rescheduling due to faculty and tutor absences, 5 to 10% of the time. This
latter task shall be designated as "TP". I am not persuaded that any further
amendments are warranted to paragraph 8.2.
As to the rating, this factor measures the strain associated with or caused
by the frequency and predictability of deadlines, interruptions, distractions and/or
workloads, multiple and/or conflicting demands and/or dealing with people in difficult
]4
situations. In this factor, the College rated the Grievor's position at level 3 and the
Union proposes a rating at level 4
There is no doubt that interruptions and multiple demands are regular
features of the Grievor's position and while responding to student inquiries, she may be
called upon to provide technical support or troubleshoot hardware and software
problems. Moreover, while the nature of a particular inquiry or computer problem may
not be predictable, the fact that interruptions and multiple demands occur regularly
tends to be predictable. Conflicting demands, on the other hand, do not appear to be a
common occurrence and I am not persuaded that the Grievor's position entails
conflicting work pressures and or unpredictable work situations involving shifts in
priorities so as to warrant a rating at level 4. In the result, in this factor, I find that a
rating at level 3 is appropriate.
Independent Action
In this section of the PDF, the final sentence of paragraph 9.4 shall be
amended to make reference to the incumbent occasionally providing information
regarding alternative web sites/linkages to students/staff. I am not satisfied that this
function is performed on a frequent basis.
This factor measures the independence of action and decisions required
by the job. Initiative, creativity and decisions are governed by various controls which
may take the form of supervision, policies, procedures or established practices. In
respect of this factor, the College proposes that the Griever's position be rated at level
3, whereas the Union proposes a rating at level 4.
The Griever is provided with IT guidelines which she uses when
troubleshooting hardware and software problems and there are also policies and
procedures dealing with the purchase of materials and supplies. As well, there is a
brochure which outlines the academic complaints procedure and although the Grievor
testified that she explains the procedure to students, Ms. Dyson testified that this
function is carried out by a counsellor. In any event, Ms. Dyson acknowledged that
other policies and procedures have been established as incidents arise.
The evidence also indicates that Ms. Dysen attends meetings at the
Centre at the beginning of each semester and, thereafter, it would appear that she is at
the Centre infrequently. Moreover, Ms. Dyson could recall only one instance in which
the Grievor contacted her to be relieved of her responsibilities at the desk in order to
complete the preparation of certain marketing materials. Apart from this occasion, it
would appear that the Grievor has little contact with her Supervisor regarding the
performance of her job duties. Moreover, although Ms. Dyson suggested that the
Grievor discusses problems which arise at the Centre with the Co-ordinator or Project
Manager and that these individuals also check any work they have assigned to her, the
Grievor testified that she was not aware of her work being checked and that she
provides completed reports dealing with matters such as Centre usage, to the Co-
ordinator. In any event, as noted by the Union, this factor deals with monitoring, input
and verification by the incumbent's Supervisor, rather than other employees of the
College. I also note that the PDF makes reference to initiative being required when
performing duties such as completing flyers and reports, checking web linkages and
troubleshooting hardware and software problems.
In the result, I cannot conclude that the Grievor's job duties are performed
in accordance with general procedures and past practices under periodic supervision
which is consistent with a rating at level 3. Moreover, I am satisfied that there is
considerable, rather than moderate, freedom to act independently and that procedures
and past practices may be modified to meet particular situations and/or problems.
Accordingly, in this factor, I find that the Grievor's position is properly rated at level 4.
Communications/Contacts
Under the heading "Purpose" in the initial box on the chart set out in
paragraph 10.1, reference shall be made to "solving" problems and to
computer/AV/"printers". Moreover, the portion dealing with discussions with IT shall
indicate that periodic testing of software and systems may be required during the
]7
resolution process. In the portion dealing with discussions regarding problem or
disruptive students, reference shall be made both to drop-in counsellors and to the
co-ordinator. As well, a notation shall be made to the effect that there may be
discussion with respect to the best course of action in dealing with such students.
This factor measures the requirement for effective communication for the
purpose of providing advice or explanations, negotiating or influencing others to reach
agreement. Consideration is given to the nature and purpose of the communication
and confidentiality of the information involved. Moreover, as noted in the job evaluation
manual, many College positions involve access to some form of confidential information
and, accordingly, this factor focuses on the manner, purpose and responsibilities
involved in communicating, rather than the content of the information being
communicated. In this case, the College rated the Grievor's position at level 2 and the
Union proposes a rating at level 4.
It is to be noted that a fairly significant portion of the Grievor's job involves
responding to inquiries, referring students to appropriate resources, scheduling
appointments and providing information relating to the services offered at the Centre.
Moreover, although the Grievor also provides technical support and troubleshoots basic
hardware and software problems, which may involve contact and discussions with IT, I
cannot conclude that her position requires the resolution of complex problem situations
or that there is a need for sophisticated influential or persuasive techniques. In this
]$
latter regard, I note that although the Grievor testified that she provided advice to a
student with a harassment complaint at a time when no counsellor was available, Ms.
Dysen testified that providing advice or counselling of this nature is not part of the
Griever's job duties. In any event, the situation described by the Griever would appear
to have been an isolated one which would not affect the rating in any event. Moreover,
although on another occasion, the Griever had to ask certain special needs students
who had become disruptive to leave the Centre, in my view, the evidence fails to
establish that her position requires sophisticated influential or persuasive techniques
which is indicative of positions rated at level 4.
Furthermore, much of the information provided by the Grievor is by way of
detailed explanation or clarification and I am not satisfied that her position requires
regular involvement with confidential information. In this regard, I note that although the
Griever is provided with passwords to assist students in logging on to the computer
system, she communicates this information directly to the individual student and
students are encouraged to change their passwords once they have logged on to the
system. The PDF also indicated that confidential discussions relating to the evaluation
of ce-ep students occur weekly or monthly and confidential discussions regarding
problem or disruptive students occur monthly. Moreover, although in Sheridan Celle.qe
and OPSEU (supra), Arbitrator Springate rated the incumbent's position at level 3 in this
factor, in doing so, he confirmed the College's rating and I note that in that case, the
incumbent handled assessment test results and had confidential sessions with students
]9
on a daily basis in connection with the peer tutoring program. In this case, in contrast, I
am not persuaded that a rating beyond level 2 is warranted.
Responsibility for Decisions and Actions
I am not satisfied that any amendment is warranted to this section of the
PDF.
This factor measures the impact on internal and public relations, the
responsibility for information management, equipment, assets and records and the
consequences of decisions and/or actions. The College proposed that the Grievor's
position be rated at level 3 whereas the Union proposed a rating at level 5.
In this case, the Grievor is responsible for the management and
maintenance of records as well as computer and technical equipment at the Centre.
The PDF also indicates that her customer service skills must be "of the highest grade"
and errors in information provided to students with respect to appointments or
troubleshooting could affect their willingness to return to the Centre. Nevertheless, it
does not appear that errors would be difficult to detect or would result in a significant
waste of resources and continuing influence on operational effectiveness as is required
for a rating at level 5, which is the highest level in this factor. On the contrary, it would
appear that errors in scheduling appointments or referring students to the wrong
2]
seized for purposes of implementation of this award. I also retain jurisdiction to deal
with any issues which remain outstanding regarding the content of the PDF.
DATED AT TORONTO, this 10th day of May, 2001.
Sole Arbitrator
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATION
College: Sheridan } Incumbent(s) Liz Visschedyk } S~: Christ/ne
I I DysozuN~
Presem Classification: Clerk C I And Prosent Pa.vb~d: 6
Job Family and ~_~ Requested by Grievor: Office Services Clerk Gtncral .Atypical .POy~d 10
1. {x] Position Description Form Attached
2. [ ] The parties agree on the content of the attached Position Description Form
3. [x]'The Union disagrees with the content of the attached Position Description Form. The Sl~ delails
of Ibis disagreement are attaeJaed. (ONLY REQUIRED FOR ARBITRATION)
FACTORS Union Arbitrator Award
Maria.cement
Level Points Level Points level Points
t. Trainlng/Tectmiad Skill 3/4 52/71 4 71 4
2. Experience 3 ~2 3 32 3
~. Comp~exi~ -~ 4} 4 $8 4
4. Judgemem 3 48 4 66 3 48
5. Moto~ s~ins C; :25 D3 37 c3
6. PhysiCalDemand 2 16 4 39 2 16
?. Season, Demand 3 28 5 50 3 28
8. StraiZ~ from Work 3 28 4 39 3
9, Indc'pe. ndent Action 2/3 19/.t3 4 46 4 4
10. Commm~ication/Contacts 2 52 4 124 2 52
Il Respc~nsibilfly for 3 44 5 80
DeciSions/Actions 3 44
12. Wo~ Envirom-nent 2 32 2 32 2 32
TOTAL I~OINTS 4] 7/ 674 480
pAYl3AtffD 450
7
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Clerk C-eneral,
ATTACHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS; [ ] The lin|on [ ] The CoHere
FOR TI~ UNION FOR MANAGEMENT
(A.,biuato:4's Signatare) I ('Date of H~-ing) I (Date of A,a'ard}