Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLangille 88-02-04 ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION (hereinafter called the Union) - and - FANSHAWE COLLEGE (hereinafter called the Employer) - and- CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF ROBERT LANGILLE (hereinafter called the Grievor) SOLE ARBITRATOR PROFESSOR IAN A. HUNTER APPEARANCES FOR THE~UNION: MR. JOHN FORD, GRIEVANCE OFFICER MR~ ROBERT LANGILLE, GRIEVOR FOR THE. COLLEGE: MR. D.L. BUSCHE, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES MR. ARIE BAKKER, MANAGER, CARETAKING SERVICES AN ARBITRATION HEARING WAS HELD IN LONDON, ONTARIO ON JANUARY 26,.1988. AWARD The 9rievor, Robert Langille, is a caretaker at the St. Thomas Adult Education Centre. He is currently classified as Atypical Caretaker C, 340 points, Pay Band 5. The Arbitration Data Sheet reveal that there are five factors in dispute: Rat±ngs College Evaluation Union Evaluation Job difficulty C2 C4 Guidance received C3 C4 Communication A2 B3 Knowledge: Training and Experience Cl C2 Knowledge: skill 2 3 The Union disagreed with two elements in the Position Description Form: (1) Duties and Responsibilities. The Union proposed slight changes in the time approximations of items 2 and 6. I note that these are "approximations". There was insufficient evidence to warrant my directing any change in the Position Description Form. (2) Training/Experience/Skill: The Union proposed changes to items 2 and 3. Again, there ws insufficient evidence to warrant my ordering a change in the Position Description Form on these items. The grievor has spent approximately 10 years as caretaker of 2 the St. Thomas Adult Education Centre. This is a "satellite" campus of Fanshawe College where classes are offered during the day and at night on a year round basis. The grievor is the sole caretaker on the 6 a.m.-2 p.m. shift. The grievor's position requires performance of three different kinds of janitorial duties. In order of the time commitment involved, these are: (1) maintenance and repair; (2) cleaning; and (3) security. (1) Maintenance and Repair The grievor performs a broad variety of maintenance and repair duties in the building. He makes minor electrial repairs, minor electrical installations and changes basic electrical equipment (bulbs, ballasts, etc.). He is called upon to repair and hang doors. He repairs and replaces doorknobs. He repairs minor appliances, such as portable humidifiers, and he routinely maintains washroom fixtures (e.g., toilets, sinks, etc.). He changes air conditioning filters and replaces humidifer belts. If there is a major electrical or plumbing problem, he calls for assistance from the main campus department concerned (i.e., plumbing, electrical, etc.). He does painting within the building. He utilizes a wide variety of tools such as hammers, screwdrivers, saws, and drills. For more major carpentry 3 repairs, he may use the college carpentry shop. (2) Cleaning Most of the interior cleaning in the building is done in the afternoon (i.e., 4 p.m.-12 p.m. shift). The grievor will do some damp mopping (e.g., if there is a leaky toilet) but he does not routinely scrub or wax floors. On occasion, however, he has worked overtime (on a weekend) either to demonstrate, or to assist in, waxing of floors. He does not routinely empty the garbage. He does have some involvement in insuring that supplies of paper, soap, etc., are maintained on hand. The grievor does considerable outside cleaning and maintenance. He cuts the grass in summer and, with a snowblower, removes the snow in winter. He sprays the hedges for bugs. He trims trees and shrubs and assumes general responsibility for the outside appearance of the grounds. The grievor is required to operate such equipment as a' riding lawnmower, a snowblower, a hedgetrimmer and a weedeater. (3) Security Security per se is a minor aspect of the grievor's job, but he does open the school at 6:00 a.m. each weekday morning and he 4 makes a primary inspection tour of the classrooms and the building to check for breakins or vandalism. If he found a broken window, he would repair it as best he could until a new pane of glass could be fitted. If there was a broken window or a break and enter after hours or on a weekend he would expect to be called in from home to assist. This has happened only once in the grievor's ten years as caretaker. The grievor conceded that his formal security functions were minimal. The first issue to be determined is the appropriate job family. The College submits that the position (admittedly Atypical) falls within the Job Family: Caretaker. The description of that 3ob family is: "This family covers positions of employees who perform housekeeping, cleaning, moving, outside grounds work, operatiOn of mechanized equipment and related repair and maintenance activities.'' The Union submits that the proper job 'family is Maintenance Hand~man whose Job Family description is: "This 'family covers positions of employees who perform semi-skilled work in tasks usually associated with one or more of the skilled trades in the installation, maintenance, repair and general upkeep of buildings, grounds, equipment and facilities." While there is obviously some overlap, both in the job family descriptions and in the particular Evaluation Criteria for 5 the two different job families, I am satisfied on a "best fit" analysis, that the grievor is properly classified in the Job Family Caretaker. I turn now to the specific factors in dispute. (1) Job Difficulty The parties are agreed on the complexity factor: C. They differ on the judgment factor. The college rating is: "Duties performed require some judgment, or choice of action within limits. Some analysis is required in problem solving." The Union's proposed rating is: "Duties performed require a considerable degree of judgment. Problem solving involves handling a variety of conventional problems, questions or situations with established analytical techniques." The difference between the parties breaks down to two factors: (a) the degree of judgment required (i.e., is it "some" or "considerable"); (b) method of problem solving and analysis involved. While the grievor engages in .a considerable variety of repairs (electrical, plumbing, carpentry) he does so at a basic 6 level. From his own evidence, it is accurate to characterize his position as requiring all kinds of routine repairs. Under questioning the grievor could not think of a non-routine unanticipated problem which had arisen. If there are major problems (for example, a broken waterline) he would call the department responsible (plumbing) at the main campus. As he himself testified: "If there are minor problems, I get working; if they are major, I phone the department." From the evidence, I concluded that the grievor exercised some, but not considerable, judgment. Some analySis is required to determine how to repair the many things that can go wrong. I do not conclude that the grievor's problem solving requires "established analytical techniques." Once again, his own answer is instructive. "With repairs there is one way of doing it; you either know it or you don't." On job difficulty, the grievor is properly classified at C2. Guidance Received The college classification is C3. "Work is performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices. Unfamiliar situations are reviewed with supervisor. Work assignments are intermittently and/or periodically checked for quality." 7 The Union proposes E4. "Work is performed in accordance with general instructions and policies involving changing conditions and problems. Supervisor may be involved on problems of major importance. Work assignments are subject to a general form of review for achievement of specific objectives and adherence to established deadlines. The grievor's supervisor, Arie Bakker, is located at the main college campus in London. Consequently, the grievor only sees him infrequently. Weeks, or months, may go by without the grievor seeing Mr. Bakker at St. Thomas. The grievor testified that not once in his ten years of employment had he ever had to call to get direction from his supervisor. "I'm lucky if I see Arie three times a year in St. Thomas." The grievor calls his supervisor on occasions to obtain supplies. The only effective check on the performance of the grievor's work is the visual observation of the school principal (Ruth Gates) and the staff. I have concluded that neither the college nor the union classification accurately reflects the grievor's Atypical caretaker position. I am not persuaded that the "Guidelines Available" is in error at C, but I am convinced that the "Nature of Review" is properly 5: "Work assignments are reviewed only for achievement of broad objectives, effectiveness of results and to ensure integration with the work of others." This change reflects the grievor's isolation at St. Thomas from the other 8 caretakers and the extremely infrequent review of work assignments by his supervisor. Consequently, the grievor should be classified at C5. Communication In considering this factor, one of the "Notes to Raters" is significant. "Contacts with teaching staff are to be rated at degree 3." The college rating is A2, in essence, contacts of a routine nature primarily with employees at comparable or lower levels within the college or with individuals below middle management level outside the college. The Union proposes B3, essentially contacts for the purpose of providing detailed explanations with employees of higher levels within the college and with individuals at middle management levels outside the college. From the evidence, I have deduced that the college is correct on the "purpose of contacts" and the union is correct on "level of contacts." The grievor's primary contact is with the school principal, Ruth Gates. She is clearly middle management or above at 9 Fanshawe College. His other contacts are with the staff at the St. Thomas Adult Education Centre. The "Notes to Raters" indicates that these are to be rated at Degree 3. Consequently, the proper rating is A3. Knowledge: Training/Experience The only difference between the college and the union is whether or not the position requires skills "normally acquired" through completion of elementary school (the college rating; Cl) or through partial completion of secondary school (the union rating; C2)._ On this point, both the grievor's evidence and that of Mr. Bakker was to the same effect. The grievor testified that he had learned some of the skills required in the 3ob in grade 9 and 10. Mr. 'Bakker testified that, as a member of the hiring committee for caretakers, he would be looking for some high school completion; usually Grade 12, but at least Grade 10. From this evidence, I am satisfied that the Union's proposed classification (C2) is correct. 10 Knowledge/Skill The College rating is 2. "Work requires the ability to apply fundamental clerical or technical skills .... " The Union proposed rating is 3: "Work requires the ability to apply specialized clerical or technical skills .... " The grievor exercises no clerical skills. Consequently, the dispute between the parties is whether or not the grievor's work requires "fundamental" or "specialized" technical skills. The phrase the grievor used over and over again in describing his job was "Jack of all trades." From the evidence, I am left with no doubt that the grievor applies fundamental technical skills. He applies those skills to a wide variety of tasks. But he does not apply specialized skills. Consequently, the current rating (2) is correct. To summarize my findings, the following areas were not in dispute: Manual Effort D4 28 points Working Conditions: Visual A5 3 Doints Working Conditions: Environment C5 21 points On the job factors in dispute, I find the following to be the proper classification. Job Difficulty C2 100 points Guidance Received C5 144 points Communications A3 35 points Knowledge: Training and Experience C2 52 points Knowledge: Skill 2 21 points The total number of points to be assigned to this classification are 404. According to the Pay Band Determination Schedule this puts the grievor in Pay Band 6. Accordingly, the grievance is allowed. DATED at the City of London this ~/~ day of February, 1988. JA. Hunter e Arbitrator COLLEGE Fanshawe GRI~;OR Robert Langille CLASSIFICATION/ POSITION Atypical Caretaker HEARING DATE January 26, 1988 APPEARANCES: MANAGEMENT UNION See Award. DECI SION: Degree Points Job Difficulty C2 100 ' Guidance Received C5 144 Communications A3 35 Training E, Exper. C2 52 Knowledge Skill 2 21 Manual Effort D4 28 Working Conditions Visual A5 3 Environ. C5 21 Total Points 4 04 Pay Band Number 6 COMMENTS: ARBITRATOR ' S