HomeMy WebLinkAboutDubreuil 03-05-07 L.
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
(Grievance of Robert Dubreuil)
between
Omario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU)
and
Cambrian College of Applied Arts and Technology
Before: Louis M. Tenace
For the Employer: Andr~ Durette, Coordinator, Staff'Relations
Leo Oman
For the Union: Mary Jane Veinott, President, Local 656, OPSEU
Robert Dubreuil
Serge Lafreni~re
Heard in Sudbury, Ontario on April 29, 2003
2
AWARD
A hearing into this matter was held in Sudbury, Ontario, At Cambrian College, on April 29, 2003.
Although there is only one grievance set down for arbitration, that of Robert Dubreuil (OPSEU ii
265613), the parties have agreed that the award should be dispositive of another grievance, that
of Serge Lafrenibre, who performs the same functions. Both grievors are seeking to be classified
as Skilled Trade Worker Atypical, Pay Band 11.
Pursuant to Article 18.4.5.1 (Restrictions) of the Support Staff Collective Agreement, the role of
the Arbitrator (or Arbitration Board) is as set out in full below:
The single Arbitrator or Arbitration Board is restricted to determining whether
the grievor's PDF accurately reflects his/her assigned job content (where
disagreement exists) and to determine whether the grievor's job is properly
classified pursuant to the CAA T SUPPORT STAFF JOB EVALUATION
MANUAL.
In this case, the parties have acknowledged the existence of two Position Description Forms
(PDF): one, dated March 12, 2002 (which the College alleges is a draft working document) which
the College asks me to disregard; a second is a re-written PDF submitted by the College on or
about May 15, 2002. The Union alleges that there is nothing on the PDF of May 12, 2002 to
identify it as a draft or a working document.
The Union is correct in asserting that there is nothing in the PDF of March 12, 2002 to suggest it
is a draft or a working document. However, after hearing both parties quite extensively on this
issue, it is abundantly clear to me that it was never meant to be a 'final' or 'official' PDF. In
making this finding, I do not in any way impugn the good faith of either party which was amply
demonstrated to me throughout the hearing. It is my conclusion, therefore, that the PDF of May
10, 2002 is the proper one to be used in reaching a determination of the two grievances.
Notwithstanding, there remains another problem as management has acknowledged the existence
of a'clerical error' in the Skills/Training/Technical Skills section of the May 10, 2002 PDF. It
specifies the need for a 'Three year community college diploma' rather than a 'Two year
community college diploma' which, according to management, is what management intended.
Management provided a credible explanation for this 'clerical error' which I accept, but I
recognize that it becomes somewhat difficult for the union to digest, good faith notwithstanding.
Therefore, it is my conclusion that, at this time, the requirement for a 'Two year community
college diploma' accurately reflects the Training/Technical skills required for these positions. I
have used the phrase "at this time" in the previous sentence because I recognize fully that this
Having rejected the PDF of March 12, 2002, I do not believe there is any need for me to go
further into the matter of whether that document reflects the grievors' assigned job content. In my
view, generally speaking, it does not. Some portions of it are excessive in their use of embellishing
and gratuitous language which can only lead to heightened controversy over the validity of any
given job description. I cite as an example the following description which appears on the PDF of
March 12, 2002:
3. COMPLEXITY
3.1 Describe the amount and nature of analysis, problem-solving and reasoning
required to perform the duties of the position
Plumber tasks can vary in difficulty and methodological approach that taxes the eight
years of necessary varied experience. The understanding of specialized equipment
function and their use combine with the variance in building system symptoms can be
staggering. There is no higher source of knowledge within the college structure to draw
upon to help correct the deficiency and there is always a time element of disruption to be
minimized. Intended tasks must be contemplated and thoroughly planned to step through
each element of effect to other processes and persons in the college. Most tasks are
unusual and their completion through sequential thought process wouM tax a competent
professional mechanical engineer.
It is to be noted that management has, in fact, during the course of these grievances, implemented
the May 10, 2002 PDF for both grievors so that they were re-classified effective on or about May
15, 2002 from Skilled Trades Workers (PB 9) to Skilled Trades Workers Atypical (PB 10). I
accept management's findings in this matter as a reasonable and proper application of the CAAT
Support Staff Job Evaluation Manual.
In view of all the considerations outlined above, it is my conclusion that the PDF of May 10, 2003
(with the clerical error amended) accurately reflects the job content of these two positions and
that the grievors, Robert Dubreuil and Serge Lafreni~re, are now properly classified as Skilled
Trade Worker Atypical, Pay Band 10. The completed Arbitration Data Sheet is attached.
As a final comment, I wish to note the positive and friendly working relationship that appears to
exist between the parties and I thank them for their sincere cooperation and straight-forwardness
during the hearing.
Signed in Ottawa on May 7th, 2003. ~ Louis M. Tenace
/
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET- SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATION
Presen~,Classifica~ion:~r~_~ ~{~ ~)O~E~ ~W ~ ¢ ~ and Present Payband:
~b Family and Payband ;;:h~quested by Grievor: ~t~ t_~ ~h~ t.J~e~ ~p~ t~l- I ~- II
~'. Position DescSpt~on Form A~ached
2. ~ The parties agr~ on the conten~ of th~ attached Position D~scription Form OR
The Union disagrees with the contents of the attached Position Description Form, The specific details of this
disagreement a-r~ as follows:
(use reverse-slde ~ necessary}
FACTORS MANAGEMENT UNION ARBIT~TOR *
5, Mo~o.S? .... qC Z~. !~ ~l AC Z~
A~ACHED WRt~EN S:U~SSIONS: ~The Union ~he Cot~ege
R THE UNION ~ FOR MANAGEMENT
Represent~flw)
FOR