Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWatts 01-11-21 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: FANSHAWE COLLEGE (Hereinafter referred to as the College) AND OPSEU (Hereinafter referred to as the Union) AND IN THE MATTER OF THE CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF D. WATTS OPSEU FILE 01C092 EXPEDITED ARBITRATOR: Gail Brent APPEARANCES: FOR THE COLLEGE: Sheila Wilson, Human Resources Consultant Julie McQuire, Human Resources Rosanna Stumpo Ba!, Program Manager, Learning Centres FOR THE UNION: Barbara Ford, Chief Steward Doris Watts, Grievor Ursula Rzeznik, Advisor Hearing held at London, Ontario on November 16, 2001. DECISION The grievance is dated November 2, 2000 and alleges that the grievor's job was improperly classified as Clerk General C, Payband 6. She claims that the proper classification should have been Clerk General D, Payband 8. The past tense is used because as a result of restructuring effective 2 April 1, 2001 the position was determinedto be redundant. Effective April 26, 2001 the grievorwas re-assigned to another position in the College. There is an agreed upon PDF which was last reviewed in September 2000. The positiontitle is Clerk, Learning and Testing Centre. There is agreement between the parties that the appropriate Job Family is Clerk. The College used the Guide Chart method and determined that the normal duties as set out in the PDF had a reasonably close approximationto the Clerk General C position. Having reviewed the PDF, having heard the additional facts brought forward by the witnesses, having heard the submissions of the parties and having looked at the Guide Charts for Clerk General C and Clerk General D, I believe that the College's position is essentially correct. In particular, the "Summary of Responsibility" and "Typical Duties" as set out in the Guide Chart for Clerk General C accurately reflect the position as described in the PDF and the evidence. The same categories in the Clerk General D Guide Chart reflect a degree ofspecialization and judgment which is not reflected in the positionbeing evaluated. If, however, that is in error and the Core Point Rating applies I would assign the following values to the disputed factors: 1 .Training/Technical Skills The PDF requires "Community College Secretarial program or equivalent combination of education and related work experience." Given that requirement I agree with the Union that the appropriate level is 4, with 71 points. $. Complexity The definition for Level 3 is: 3 Job duties require the performance of various routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. The primary difference between Level 3 and 4 is that the "complex tasks" are described as "varied, non-routine" rather than"various routine". The factor measures "the amount and nature ofanalysis, problem-solving, and reasoning required to perform job-related duties". With respect to the job as defined in the PDF, I consider that the tasks can better be described as "various" and "routine" rather than "varied" and "non-routine". I find that Level 3, 41 points is correct. 4. Judgement The factor is to determine "the independent judgement and problem-solving required on the job". Level 3 is described as: Job duties require some moderate degree ofjudgement. Problem-solving involves the identification and breakdown of the facts and components ofthe problem situation. Level 4 is described as: Job duties require a considerable degree ol~udgement. Problem-solving involves handling a variety of conventional problems, questions or solutions with established analytical techniques. Based on the PDF and what I heard, I considerthat the degree ol~udgment is better described as "moderate" rather than "considerable". While there are overlaps in trying to define any element of"problem-solving", all in all Level 3 appears to me to be the better fit. The factor should be rated as Level 3, 48 points. 6. Physical Demand This job demands only occasional moderate physical effort. It generally has only the normal demands of an office situation. 4 The factor should be rated as Level 2, 16 points. 7. Sensory Demand This factor looks at the level ofconcentration combined with the frequency of the demand for"careful attention to detail and accuracy". Level 3 is a combination of"moderate concentration" with "frequent" attention to detail or "considerable concentration" with "occasional" attention to detail. Level 4 is "considerable concentration" with "occasional" attention to detail or"extensive concentration" with "occasional" attention to detail. Given the evidence, I think that either "moderate concentration" with "frequent" attention to detail or "considerable concentration" with "occasional" attention to detail is the more accurate description of sensory demand. The factor should be rated as Level 3, 28 points. 8. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines According to the PDF all of the identified strains are either "predictable" or "usually predictable". Based on that, the description in the PDF and evidence and the description of the levels, I find that Level 3 is the better description of this factor. The factor should be rated as Level 3, 28 points. 9. Independent Action Level 3 is defined as follows: Job duties are performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices under periodic supervision, with occasional periods of Supervisor input or verification. There is moderate freedom to act independently. Level 4 is: Job duties are performed in accordance with procedures and past practices which may be adapted and modified to meet particular situations and/or problems. There is considerable freedom to act independently with Supervisor input or verification when requested. 5 Given the PDF and the evidence I findthat the degree of freedom to act independently is best captured by the level 3 definition. Further, I consider that the duties are performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices as a general rule. The factor should be rated as Level 3, 33 points. 10. Communications/Contacts Level 2 is defined as: Job duties require communication for the purpose of providing detailed explanations, clarification, and interpretation of data or information. Theremay be needto empathize with and understand the needs of others in order to handle problems or complaints. Occasional involvement with confidential information which has minor disclosure implications. Level 3 is: Job duties require communication for the purpose ofproviding guidance or technical advice of a detailed or specialized nature, or for the purpose of explaining various matters by interpreting procedures, policy, or theory. There may be need to promote participation and understanding andto secure co-operation in order to respond to problems or situations ora sensitive nature. Regular involvement with confidential information which has moderate disclosure implications I consider that Level 2 is the better fit given the evidence and the PDF. The factor should be rated as Level 2, 52 points. DATED AT LONDON, ONTARIO THIS 2~ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001 Gail Brent ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATION College: ~-/::~/k~-~~ i ....bent: ~©F~l<~ LLJ/~'ITS Supervisor: ..... t Classification: ~U~-~-~-- C and Present Payband: Family and Payband Requested by Grievor: ~f)~/~/:~ S. 1. Position Description Form Attached 2. 0 The partiesagreeon the contents of the attached Position Description Form OR 0 The Union disagrees with the contents of the attached Position Description Form. The specific details of this disagreement are as follows: (use reverse side if necessary) AWARD FACTORS MANAGEMENT UNION ARBITRATOR Level Points Level Points Level Points 1. Training/Technical Skills ~ .,~,~. 4L / ? ,~ ' 7( 2. Experience g ~ ._~ 3~ 37_ .~,~-~ Lj 4. Jud_qement 3 z~ ¢ ~ I L~ 5. Motor Skills 3 .~I ~, 6. Physical Demand ~ /b cb Z, 1~ 7. Sensory Demand 3 4g ¢ 3 8. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines ,~ ~¢ q 3 ~,~ 9. Independent Action --~ -~ ~ 10. Communications/Contacts ~ .~ 3 ~ 11. Responsibility for Decisions/Actions , ~. Work Environment " /~ " I 0 PAYBAND/TOTAL POINTS e JOB CLASSIFICATION C ~___/Z/~ .~ f. ~ L.z~/~, K C ATTACHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: 0 The Union 0 The College FOR THE UNION ANAG EMENT (Un~°n~Rep~esenta~ {Dat~e)~¢'/ ~'/'/° (C~)~_~g~ res en ,ative) (Date) FOR, ARBITRAT_QR'S USE: ~ ~l/o,, (Arbitrator's Signature) (Date of Heari g) (Date of Award) 93-12-09 b:datasheet.doc