HomeMy WebLinkAboutTeodoro 96-02-15IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION L ' /' 0 c~ ,
BETWEEN:
FANSHAWE COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY
("the College")
and
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
("the Union")
AND IN THE MATTER OF A CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF JOE TEODORO
(O.P.S.E.U. #95A864)
ARBITRATOR: Ian Springate
APPEARANCES
For the College: Sheila Wilson, Human Resources Officer
Jack Roberts, Chairperson, Civil/Architectural Technology Division
For the Union: Louise Watt, Chief Steward
Joe Teodoro, Grievor
HEARING: In London on January 23, 1996
, ' 2
AWARD
[INTRODUCTION
The grievor is currently classified as a Technologist B. This classification is paid at the
payband 10 level.. On February 13, 1995 the grievor filed a grievance which contended that he
should properly be classified as a Technologist at the payband 12 level. The highest typical
technologist classification provided for in the relevant job evaluation system is that of a
Technologist C at payband 11.
A position description form respecting the grievor's position was filed by the parties as an
agreed position description. At the hearing the grievor indicated that he did not agree with the
contents of the form. He stated that he was advised at a level 2 hearing that he had to sign the
form even though he did not want to. There is no need for me to decide whether the grievor
actually agreed with the position description form or the circumstances under which he came to
sign it. The Union has adopted the position description form and it is the Union which is a party
to the governing collective agreement and which has cartage of the grievance at arbitration.
In a written brief filed prior to the hearing the representative of the College stated that the
College had classified the grievor's position using job evaluation guide charts which form part of
the job'evaluation system. She indicated that the College felt the grievor's duties and
responsibilities as outlined on the position description form were a reasonably close
approximation to those' of a Technologist B.
The guide charts contain the following entries relating to the duties and responsibilities of
a Technologist B and a Technologist C
TECHNOLOGIST B
SUMMARY OF RESPONSIBILITY
Incumbents provide technical expertise of a specialized nature to faculties,
administrative areas and students, using independent judgement to determine
services and methods required to meet user needs.
TYPICAL DUTIES
- Designs and/or develops equipment, systems, facilities, materials, etc. to meet
user output requirements.
- Plans, organizes and conducts experiments and demonstrations explaining correct
procedures and theoretical principles involved.
- Evaluates equipment and other resources and makes recommendations prior to
purchase.
- Controls supply inventories and budgets.
- May assist in student evaluations in relation to learning activities in which the
Technologist B takes part.
TECHNOLOGIST C
SUMMARY OF RESPONSIBILITY
Incumbents p~'ovide senior technical support in matters of a complex nature
requiring a high degree of independent judgement, technical specialization and
experience.
TYPICAL DUTIES
In addition to the duties described for Technologist B:
- Plans for the provision of technical services and effective utilization of resources
based on independent assessment of the College's needs.
-- Co-ordinates projects involving overall planning, development, purchasing and
testing of equipment and resources.
- Develops procedures for the administration of a function.
- SoNes a wide range of complex problems associated with specialization.
Section VII of the job evaluation system contains a core point rating plan which indicates
that it is to be used to evaluate atypical positions as well as other positions with duties that cannot
readily be evaluated using the job evaluation guide charts. The College and the Union agreed on
the ratings for five of the 12 factors in the core point rating plan The remaining seven factors are
discussed separately below.
THE GRIEVOR'S DUTIES
The grievor is employed in the Civil/Architectural Division at the College. Approximately
20 percent of his time is spent in maintaining the Division's Architectural Reference Centre. This
duty involves maintaining and updating information and materials related to architecture and
construction as well as information relating to various building standards. The grievor indicated
that he acquires product material from manufacturers through manufacturer mail outs; by
telephoning firms and asking them to forward information; and by attending at an annual trade
show. He stated that a lot of the information he receives is on computer disks and to avoid
having students simply copy the material into their projects he makes a hard copy of the
information for students to look at.
The grievor assists students to use the material in the Architectural Reference Centre,
particularly when they are doing assignments. He indicated that he does not simply provide
answers to students Who are too lazy to look up required information. The grievor testified that
students also come to him for help when they do not understand a class assignment or the way a
component was taught in class. He stated that he tries to identify the student's difficulty and then
resolve the problem by bringing forth more information or approaching the issue from a different
point of view. According to the grievor he tries to enhance the information that students receive
in class.
The grievor spends about 10 percent of his time preparing instructional material.
According to the grievor this involves the preparation of overheads, blueprints and computer
drawings. The grievor stated that at times faculty members provide him with a rough sketch or a
verbal description and ask him to prepare a drawing for use in class. He indicated that he also
prepares drawings for individual students to help explain details to them.
In addition to preparing instructional material the grievor prepares diagrams, report covers
and signs at the request of administrative staff and faculty. The gfievor testified that when
renovations were proposed for the construction shop and drafting area he prepared drawings
showing the proposed changes.
The grievor maintains equipment and supplies in two manual drafting rooms, a CADD
laboratory and a blueprint room. He also maintains and controls equipment and supplies which
are available for loan to students. These duties include performing preventive maintenance as
well as certain repairs. According to the grievor in most cases equipment difficulties are caused
by students improperly operating the equipment. If repairs have to be performed by an outside
service the grievor prepares the necessary work requisitions. The grievor also orders supplies as
required. Another of his duties is to investigate new equipment and software and make
recommendations with respect to purchase decisions.
The grievor.shows students how to use the equipment in the drafting rooms. He also
demonstrates the use of computers and software to staff and students. This includes assisting
students to use computers and software when they are doing assignments and demonstrating their
use in class. The.grievor testified that faculty are often not up to speed with respect to computer
hardware and software and so he is asked to instruct students on how to use them. The
representative of the College asked the grievor to explain what he meant by instructing. The
grievor replied that he is asked by instructors to demonstrate or instruct. He gave the example of
instructing students how to create and manipulate files when a new CADD program was
introduced that had a different command structure than the previous program.
The grievor testified that at times the Academic Computer Service requests an hour to
hour; day to day; or week to week analysis of the use of the CADD lab and he then prepares a
brief report concerning the lab's usage.
Ifa faculty member is unable to invigilate a test the grievor will do so. Last Christmas he
assisted a faculty member to invigilate a very large class.
In the past the grievor has supervised the movement of furniture in preparation for carpet
cleaning. On the last few occasions he moved the furniture himself.
Each semester the grievor gets a list from Facilities Management with respect to student
lockers allocated to the School of Technology. The grievor uses the list to allocate lockers for
about 2,078 students in the Civil/ArchitecturaI Division and certain other divisions.
At one time the grievor and another technologist did the time tabling for the
CiviL/.Architectural Division. This duty is now performed by someone else. The grievor assists
this individual by answering questions respecting the architectural technology area and by
reviewing the initial time table and raising potential problems. The gdevor gave the example of a
class being timetabled to be in one area when the material required for the class is stored in
another area.
COMPLEXITY
This factor measures the amount and nature of analysis; problem-solving and reasoning
required to perform job related duties. The College rated this factor at level 4. The Union argues
that level 6, the highest rating possible, is more appropriate. The criteria for these and the
intervening level 5 rating are set out below. The classification system indicates that a level 4
rating is typically associated with a Technologist B position and a level 5 rating with a
Technologist C position.
4 Job duties require the performance of varied, non-routine, complex tasks
involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods.
5 Job duties require the performance of complex and relatively unusual tasks
involving specialized processes and/or methods.
6 Job duties require the investigation and resolution of a variety of unusual
conditions involving the adaptation and/or development of specialized processes
and methods.
The grievor testified that when he assists students he deals with a number of unusual
conditions that require the development of specialized technical methods. He stated that with
architectural technology everything is more or less specialized. The representative of the College
subsequently asked the grievor what was the most difficult aspect of his position. He replied that
it was .dealing with students due to their conflicting dates and demands.
The representative of the College asked the grievor to give an example of an unusual
condition that he had dealt with. The grievor referred to a student project related to the design of
a condominium project having a particUlar R insulation rating. The grievor testified that because
the complex was to be heated using electricity in order to achieve the required R value it appeared
that an unusual construction process would be required. He stated that he used a reference
manual to locate companies which supplied insulation and then called them to explain the
problem. He located an American supplier of a product that would achieve the required R value
while allowing the use of conventional construction techniques. Presumably the grievor requested
that the supplier forward information relating to the product to be used by the students in doing
the project. The representative of the College asked the grievor what specialized processes and
methods he had developed during this process. He replied that it was the process of being able to
problem solve independently as well as the process of evaluating the products available to see if
they met requirements.
The grievor's evidence suggests that the complexity aspect of his position is related in part
to the complexity of student assignments and the complexity of material respecting available
building products. His work in assisting students to access and utilize this materialis clearly
complex and non-routine. I do not believe, however, that it can reasonably be said that each time
he assists a student with a different project he is performing a relatively unusual task involving a
specialized process or method. His basic task remains the same, namely to assist students to
access and understand relevant materials. The development of the insulation material referred to
above doubtlessly involved the development and/or adaptation of specialized processes and
methods. The grievor's action in phoning suppliers to see if they had such an insulating material,
however, did not. Having regard to these considerations I conclude that the grievor's functions
do not meet the criteria for either a level 5 or a level 6 rating.
This conclusion is supported by the relevant job evaluation guide charts. The/grievor's
role in assisting students with architectural material can be viewed as providing technical expertise
of a specialized nature to students as well as the use of independent judgement to determine
services and methods required to meet student needs. These functions are referred to in the
summary of the responsibilities of a Technologist B, a position typically rated at level 4 for
complexity. The typical duties of a Technologist C, which is rated at level 5, go well beyond this
and include functions which the grievor does not perform, including planning for the provision of
technical services and the utilization of resources based on an independent assessment of the
College's needs as well as the co-ordination of projects. This indicates that the grievor does not
perform the type of complex functions associated with a level 5 rating.
Having regard to these considerations I affirm the level 4 rating for complexity given by
the College.
JUDGEMENT
The core point rating plan states that this factor assesses the difficulty in identifying
various available chOices of action and in exercising judgement to select the appropriate action
and that it also considers mental processes such as analysis, reasoning or evaluation.
The College rated the judgement factor of the grievor's job at level 5 while the Union
contends that a level 6 rating is more appropriate. The criteria for these ratings are as follows:
5 Job duties require a significant degree of judgement. Problem-solving involves
· interpreting complex data or refining work methods and techniques to be used.
6 Job duties require a high degree of judgement. Problem-solving involves
adapting analytical techniques and development of new information on various
situations and problems.
The grievor testified that he must exercise a high degree of judgement to work
independently. He stated that a great amount of judgement is also required when balancing his
time between helping students and performing his other job duties.
According to the grievor he problem solves by adapting analytical techniques and
developing new information on problems. As an example of this he referred to technical
information that is provided on computer disks and his practice of preparing overheads or large
drawings so that students can have access to the information without just inserting a disk and
copying the information onto a drawing.
The grievor testified that when assisting students and faculty he performs research to
come up with new information. He gave the example of the condominium complex project
referred to earlier. He stated that after a week of phone calls he located a manufacturer with the
required product and this was new information for the faculty member involved.
I do not agree with the grievor that producing a hard copy of material for students to use
rather than simply giving them a disk involves the adaptation of analytical techniques or the
development of new information. I also do not view contacting suppliers for information about
their products for use in student projects as involving "the development of new information on
various situations and problems" which is what is required by the criteria for a 6 rating.
I presume the grievor's role in assisting students with projects is to help them access
product information and to understand the material but he does not actually tell them how to do
their projects. Decisions about what approaches students will adopt and what material they will
include in a project are logically made by the students themselves and the quality of their decisions
is reflected in the grades that are awarded by their instructors.
The representative of the Union contended that the grievor exercises a high degree of
judgement when on the basis of an idea he develops a document or drawing for use by an
instructor. The grievor's role in preparing instructional material logically does involve the
exercise of judgement. The difficult question is whether it involves a "significant" degree of
judgement so as to meet the criteria for a level 5 rating or a "high" degree of judgement which
meets the criteria for a level 6 rating. The guide chart for a typical Technologist B position with a
level 5 rating for judgement indicates that someone in this position uses independent judgement to
determine services and methods required to meet user needs. It also lists as a typical duty the
designing and/or developing materials to meet user output requirements. These appear to
describe the grievor's role in preparing instructional material for faculty. The guide chart for a
typical Technologist C with a level 6 rating does not include any references to preparing material.
The logical conclusion from this is that the development of material by the grievor involves the
exerCise of a significant degree of judgement and warrants a level 5 rating.
Having regard to these considerations I affirm the level 5 rating given by the College.
PHYSICAL DEMAND
This factor measures the demand on physical energy required to complete tasks. The
College rated this factor at level 3; the Union at level 4. The criteria for these two ratings are as
follows:
3. Job duties require regular physical demand. There is a regular need for speed
and repetitive use of muscles. Employee is in uncomfortable or awkward bodily
positions for short periods of time with some flexibility of movement.
Employee uses continuous light physical effort,
OR
recurring periods of moderate physical effort,
OR
occasional periods of heavy physical effort.
4. Job duties may require frequent physical demand. There is a frequent
requirement for repetition and speed. Employee may be in awkward bodily
positions over extended periods of time with limited flexibility of movement.
Employee uses continuous moderate physical effort,
OR
recurring heavy physical effort.
The grievor testified that he engages in heavy physical activity on a recurring basis every
semester when furniture has to be put in place or rearranged and when large orders of blueprint
and plotting paper must be put away. The core point rating plan, however, indicates that the term
"recurring" applies to physical demands which occur "most" of a day. The better description
respecting this level of physical activity on the gfievor's part is that it occurs occasionally.
The grievor testified that there is a need for repetition and speed when performing tasks
such as preparing blueprints. ~e also stated that he is constantly moving quickly. He indicated
that he may help several groups of students; fix a drafting table; assist students in the CADD lab;
and then help someone using the plotter. He stated that he is constantly on his feet.
The representative of the College asked the grievor if the physical demand on him was
similar to that for a skilled trades employee which is an illustrative classification for a level 4
rating. The grievor replied that if the reference was to someone climbing ladders or lifting bricks
the answer was no.
The position description form states that the grievor spends 60 percent of his time
walking; 10 percent of his time lifting; and 30 percent of his time sitting at a desk using a
computer. The position description form also contains the comments set out below. It will be
noted that the first paragraph contains wording from the criteria for a level 3 rating with an
indication that this is the situation most of the time; and the second paragraph contains wording
from the criteria for a level 4 rating with an indication that this applies when students have due
dates.
Regular physical demand. There is a regular need for speed and repetitive use of
muscles by incumbent at most times.
Frequent physical demand. There is a frequent requirement for repetition and
speed by incumbent during times when students have due dates.
It is apparent that most of the grievor's physical effort involves walking as he moves
between locations. This would appear to involve light physical effort. The highest rating allowed
for light physical effort is level 3. The grievor's work when preparing blue prints would appear to
involve moderate as opposed to heavy physical effort. This task either did not rate a mention in
the time breakdown set out above or is included in the 10 percent of the time allocated to lifting.
The core point rating plan suggests that an activity which occurs for "part" but not "most" of a
day is properly described as occasional. Accordingly it appears that the blueprint work falls
below the criteria for a level 3 rating. Even if it can be viewed as occurring on a recurring basis,
this would only bring the work within the criteria for a level 3 rating. As noted above heavy
physical effort on the part of the grievor occurs occasionally, which also fits the criteria for a level
3 rating. In light of theSe considerations I conclude that level 3 is the appropriate rating.
SENSORY DEMAND
This factor measures the demand on mental energy while performing tasks. The College
argues for a level 3 rating while the Union contends that a level 5 rating, the highest rating
possible, is more appropriate. The criteria for level 3, 4 and 5 ratings are as follows:
3. Job duties require moderate visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental
energy and frequent careful attention to detail and accuracy.
OR
Job duties require considerable visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental
energy and occasional careful attention to detail and accuracy.
OR
Job duties require extensive visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental energy
and periodic careful attention to detail and accuracy.
4. Job duties require considerable visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental
energy and frequent careful attention to detail and accuracy
OR
Job duties require extensive visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental energy
and occasional careful attention to detail and accuracy.
5. Job duties require extensive visual, auditory, or sensory demand on mental
energy and frequent careful attention to detail and accuracy.
The grievor testified that he felt all of his duties require extensive visual, auditory or
sensory demands on mental energy. He indicated that due to the technical nature of student
problems it is important that he listen carefully to their problems so that they can be resolved
accurately. He also stated that a high degree of sensory demand is required when he is
demonstrating to students since he must listen to their questions and get his points across. The
grievor stated that careful attention to detail and accuracy are important because he does not have
the time to do things twice.
The position description form contains the following statement respecting the factor of
sensory demand:
Demonstrating use of equipment, i.e. plotters, computers, blueprint machine, to
students. Demonstrating use of technical resources in Architectural Reference
Centre to students. Preparation of projects for Civil/Architectural Division on
computer. All require concentration and careful attention to detail and accuracy.
Job duties require normal visual, auditory and sensory demand on mental energy.
The above statement indicates that the grievor's duties require frequent careful attention to
detail and accuracy. This meets the criteria for either a level 3, 4 or 5 rating. The statement
indicates that there is a "normal" visual, auditory and sensory demand on mental energy.
Presumably a normal demand equates with a moderate demand, which only meets the criteria for
a level 3 rating. This suggests that level 3 is the appropriate rating.
Another relevant consideration is the fact that the three levels of technologist, namely
Technologist A, B, and C, are included in the core point rating plan as illustrative classifications
for a level 3 rating for the factor of sensory demand. All of the grievor's duties appear to be those
of a technologist. There is nothing in the evidence to suggest that the demand on his mental
energy exceeds that associated with other technologists.
Having regard to these considerations, I conclude that a level 3 rating is appropriate.
STRAIN FROM WORK PRESSURES/DEMANDS/DEADLINES
The College rated this factor at level 3. The Union submits that a level 5 rating, the
highest rating possible, is more appropriate. The criteria for these ratings, and the intervening
level 4 rating, are as follows:
3. Job duties involve moderate work pressures or demands. Interruptions,
changing deadlines, multiple demands occur regularly but are usually predictable.
Occasionally, critical deadlines may occur.
4. Job duties involve conflicting work pressures and frequent interruptions in
workflow. Work situations may be unpredictable with shifts in priorities and
occasional critical deadlines.
5. Job duties involve continuous work pressures and unpredictable interruptions in
workflow. Numerous conflicting demands and tight deadlines occur frequently.
The grievor testified that he faces continuous work pressures associated with
accommodating the needs of different students. He stated that when accommodating one group
of students other groups of students will be waiting for assistance, often at other locations. He
indicated that he faces numerous conflicting demands and tight deadlines associated with tasks
requested by faculty and his supervisor but particularly with respect to due dates for student
projects. He also indicated that apart from the end of semesters he often does not know when
student deadlines are until students come to him for assistance.
The position description form describes the strain associated with the grievor's position in
the following terms using language taken directly from the criteria for a level 5 rating:
Job duties include continuous work pressures and unpredictable interruptions in
workflow. Numerous conflicting demands and tight deadlines occur frequently
when providing technical support for staff and students, particularly during times
of student due dates.
Often works on more than one project at a time with frequent interruptions to
solve problems encountered by students and/or faculty.
The position description form includes the follOwing breakdown of the grievor's time and
predictability of strain. UP means usually prediciable while NP means not predictable:
Task % of time Predictability
Meeting deadlines >60% UP
Multiple or conflicting deadlines >60% NP
Workload or volume >60% UP
Dealing with people in difficult situations 10 - 50% NP
Interruptions in work flow >60% NP
The representative of the Union relied on the fact that the position description form
describes the grievor's work pressures in the same language utilized in the criteria for a level 5
rating. The representative of the College contended that the evidence indicates that the ghevor in
fact faces moderate work pressures and that interruptions while regular are usually predictable.
She noted that not a single typical classification is rated under the classification system at level 5.
The core point rating plan indicates that when rating a position the position description
form is to be used to tentatively evaluate the position. To ensure a uniform application of the plan
the illustrative classifications are then reviewed along with the factor evaluations and total point
ratings for all typical classifications. This suggests that the language utilized in a position
description form will not be determinative of a rating if it would result in a lack of consistency.
On the other hand, because the position description form was agreed to by the parties the
language utilized in the form should logically be given effect to unless the result would clearly be
inappropriate.
The evidence suggests that the grievor is constantly engaged in a number of tasks
including assisting students with problems and assignments. This involves time constraints that
could be viewed as involving interruptions and multiple demands that occur regularly but are
usually predictable in the sense that the grievor can expect to be constantly asked for assistance by
students. The wording of the position description form, including the percentage figures set out
above, however, suggest that the College places great weight on the grievor's assistance to
students; the College expects him to cope with conflicting student requests for assistance to the
point of being under constant pressure; and the College views student project deadlines as
deadlines that the grievor is expected to meet when responding to requests for assistance. In this
context the language agreed to by the College and the Union in the position description form does
not clearly result in an inconsistency in the classification system. Accordingly, based on this
language I find a level 5 rating to be appropriate.
INDEPENDENT ACTION
This factor measures the independence of action and decisions required by a job. The
College rated the grievor's position at level 4 while the Union argues for level 5, the highest level
possible. The criteria for these ratings are as follows:
4 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 Job duties are performed in accordance with general instructions and policies
involving changing conditions and problems. There is significant freedom to act
independently.
The grievor utilized the language from the criteria for a level 5 rating when he testified
that he performs his duties in accordance with general instructions and policies and has significant
freedom to act independently. He stated that it is not often that he has to talk with his supervisor
Mr. Jack Roberts, the Chairperson of the Civil/Architectural Technology Division. Mr. Roberts
indicated that he talks with the grievor once or twice a week. The position description form
contains the following entries with respect to the factor of independent action:
9.1 Describe the kind of instructions that are required or provided at the beginning
of a typical work assignment.
There is freedom to act independently in carrying out duties and
responsibilities. Parameters accompany special projects. Job duties are
performed in accordance with general instructions and policies involving
changing conditions and problems on any new or unfamiliar task as it arises.
9.3 Indicate how regularly is the position's work checked? (i.e. several times daily,
in process, weekly or on completion of the project, monthly). Describe how the
work is reviewed (i.e. detailed review, by exception, by report, by discussion).
Work is reviewed by exception through discussion.
9.4 Describe the duties that are the incumbent's responsibility where independent
action requires initiative and/or creativity and indicate how often the duties occur.
Maintenance of equipment will require initiative and/or creativity, especially
to old equipment (weekly).
Managing student project due dates/end of semester due dates and impact on
incumbent's physical and human resources by staff and students in the
Architectural Reference Centre (weekly).
Procuring educational resources for architectural and construction programs
(weekly).
9.5 What typical problems are normally referred to the position's Supervisor for
solution.
Budgetary and administrative problems are referred. Sensitive or technical
matters beyond the scope of the position are discussed with the Supervisor,
with the objective of determining the appropriate approach.
The position description form uses language taken from the criteria for a level 5 rating
when it states that job duties are performed in accordance with general instructions and policies
involving changing conditions and problems. The form, however, goes on to contradict these
statements when it refers to work being reviewed by exception through discussion and the grievor
referring budgetary and administrative problems as well as sensitive and technical matters beyond
the scope of the position to a supervisor. The position description form also indicates that
independent action on the part of the grievor relates to functions such as equipment maintenance,
assisting students and obtaining educational resources, all of which appear to be duties that would
be performed by someone in a typical Technologist B position.
One of the illustrative examples for a level 5 rating is a Technologist C, whose typical
duties include functions such as planning for the provision of technical services based on an
independent assessment of the College's needs. The type of independent action taken by the
grievor is of a much more limited nature. I am satisfied that it would result in an inconsistent
application of the core point rating plan if the grievor's position were to be rated at level 5.
Accordingly, I confirm the level 4 rating given by the College.
COMMUNICATION/CONTACTS
This factor measures the requirement for effective communication for the purpose of
providing advice, explanation, influencing others and/or reaching agreement. The College rated
the grievor's position at level 3 while the Union contends that level 4 is more appropriate. The
grievor in his evidence described his communication responsibilities using the criteria for a level 5
rating, which is the highest rating possible. The position description form uses language which to
some extent parallels the criteria for a level 5 rating when it states, "Job duties require
communication for the purposes of providing detailed technical explanations or instructions in the
field of Architectural Technology". Accordingly, I have set out below the criteria for all three
levels as well as a note to raters concerning confidential information.
3 Job duties require communication for the purpose of providing 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 and to secure
co-operation in order to respond to problems or situations of a sensitive nature.
Regular involvement with confidential information which has moderate disclosure
implications.
4 Job duties require communication for the purpose of providing basic instruction
or for the resolution of complex problem situations. There may be a need for
sophisticated influential or persuasive techniques in order to address the problem
of those with special needs. Regular involvement with confidential and sensitive
information where disclosure implications are significant.
5 Job duties require communication for the purpose of providing highly detailed
or complex explanations or instructions. There may be a need to secure
understanding, co-operation or agreement for the purpose of concluding
negotiation activities. Extensive involvement with confidential and sensitive
information where disclosure implications could result in adverse publicity and/or
litigation procedures.
Note to Raters
Many college jobs deal with some information that is confidential. The focus in this
factor is on the manner, purpose and responsibilities involved in communicating,
rather than the content of the information being communicated. Therefore, raters
should not rate the information, but the communications responsibilities involved
in handling it.
The grievor testified that he provides highly detailed complex explanations or instructions.
When asked by the representative of the College to give examples of this he replied that it
depends on the problem as well as the detail that a student is looking for. He stated that he tries
not to give the whole answer so that the student will do some of the research and problem
solving. When again asked for examples the grievor referred to providing students with product
literature and texts, explaining how they can utilize them, and also showing students various
computer commands. Apart from the wording of the position description form these types of
communications would appear to involve providing technical advice of a detailed or specialized
nature.
It was the grievor's evidence that he has extensive involvement with confidential issues
and information where disclosure could result in adverse publicity and/or litigation procedures.
He stated that as a result of being present at Divisional and Program Team meetings he becomes
aware of some of the sensitive issues within the Division. He indicated that his additional
involvement with confidential information has primarily been limited to situations where faculty
members left marked assignments on a table in the Reference Centre for students to pick up.
When this occurred the grievor either talked to the faculty member about the impropriety of
allowing others to see a student's mark, or on his own initiative he gathered up the assignments
and handed them to the appropriate students. Based on this evidence I find that the grievor does
not have a regular involvement with confidential information. Further, his limited involvement
does not involve communications responsibilities which is what the note to raters indicates is to
be measured by this factor.
Even if it is accepted that the grievor's position meets the criteria for a level 4 rating with
respect to the purpose of his communications, it clearly does not meet that part of the criteria
requiring regular involvement with confidential and sensitive information where disclosure
implications are significant. Accordingly, the position does not meet the criteria for a level 4
rating. A level 3 rating is more appropriate.
CONCLUSION
The evidence indicates that apart from the element of strain from work
pressures/demands/deadlines the grievor's position corresponds fairly closely to that of a typical
Technologist B. The College's core point rating of the position gave it a point total of 634. My
finding that a 5 rating is appropriate for the element of strain raises this to 656. This total is still
within the range covered by payband 10. Given these considerations the grievance is hereby
dismissed.
Dated at Toronto this 15th day of February 1996.
Arbitrator
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATION
College: F'~~5/'/FlcO~ Incumbent: ,7'0~ 7'~¢Z3~,~ Supervisor: ~
Classification: ~o~~)~5 ~ ~ and Present Payband:
Job. _,nily and Payband Requested by Grievor: ~~~/'5~~ ~Y~
1. Position Description Form A~ached
2. ~ The pa~ies agree on the contents of the a~ached Position Description Form
OR
~ The Union disagrees with the contents of the a~ached Position Description Form. The specific details of this
disagreement are as follows:
(use reverse side if necessary)
FACTO RS MANAGEMENT UNION ARBITRATOR
Level Points Level Polnt~ Level Points
1. Training/Technical Skills ' (~ /1~ ~ /[0 ~) / / O
2. Experience /1/ ~/~ ~' ~ ~S ~ ~ ~
3. Complexi~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ -
4. Judgement ~ ~ ~ ~ /0 ~ ~ ~
{otor Skills ~ ~ ~b~ C ~ ~ C ~ ~
6. Physical Demand ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7. Senso~ Demand ~ ~ ~ ~O 3 ~ ~
8. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines ~ ~ ~ ~O .~ ~
9. n ..en ent Actio. 5 bO
10. Communications/Contacts 3 ~ ~ ~ /Z ~ ~ ~
1 1. Responsibiliw for Decisions/Actions ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2
12. Work Environment ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 5 ~
PAYBAND~OTAL POINTS I I :Z
JOBC~SSIFICATION (5~ ~ (10) '~5~' (/Z) ~ ~ ~t0~
A~ACHED WRI~EN SUBMISSIONS: ~ The Union ~ The College
FOR THE UNION FOR MANAGEMENT
(Date) (College Representative) (Date)
(~rievor)
(Union Representative) (Date)
........ r{BITRATOR'S USE:
(Date of Headng~'
93-12-09 b:datasheet.doc