HomeMy WebLinkAboutFurness 98-10-27In the matter of an arbitration
between
FANSHAWE COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY
(hereinafter referred to as the College)
and
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION, Local 109
(hereinafter referred to as the Union)
Classification Grievance of Norma Fumess
Sole Arbitrator: Gregory J. Brandt
Appearances:
For the College: Ms. Sheila Wilson, Human Resources
Ms. Marilyn Peaker, Manager, Student Awards
For the Union: Ms. Louise Watt, Chief Steward, Local 109
Ms. Norma Fumess, Grievor
Ms. Barb Ford, Advisor
Hearing:
Fanshawe College
October 21, 1998
2
AWARD
1. Introduction and Background
The grievor is employed in the Student Awards Department of the College. That
department is responsible for the administration of the College's awards and scholarships
program including the Canada Student Loan/Ontario Student Loan program. At the time
of her grievance on February 17, 1997 she was classified as a Clerk General C, payband
6. In this grievance she claims that she should be classified as Clerk General Atypical,
payband 7.
The Arbitration Data Sheet completed by the parties sets out their respective
ratings for the various Job Evaluation Factors as follows:
Factor College Union
Level Points Level Points
1. Training/Technical Skills 3 52 5 91
2. Experience 3 32 3 32
3. Complexity 3 41 3 41
4. Judgment 3 48 4 66
5. Motor Skills C3 25 C3 25
6. Physical Demand 2 16 2 16
7. Sensory Demand 4 39 4 39
8. Strain from Work Pressure 3 28 4 39
9. Independent Action 3 33 3 33
10. Communications 2 52 2 52
11. Responsibility for Decisions 3 44 3 44
12. Work Environment 1 10 1 10
Thus, there are 3 factors in dispute: Training/Technical Skills, Judgment, and Strain from
Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines.
The parties agree that the Position Description Form accurately describes the
position as of the date of the grievance. It provides, inter alia, as follows:
Position Summary
Under direction of the Manager, Student Awards, responsible for performing specific
duties within the Student Awards Department directly related to the College's accounts
receivable system, releasing of OSAP and other financial assistance funds to students,
some community liaison work and responding to student inquiries.
The Duties and Responsibilities of the position as set out in the PDF are as follows:
Records OSAP secured tuition billings on students accounts and deposits 40%
on a regular basis all bank remitted tuition fee payments to College's accounts
receivable system. Reconciles departmental accounts receivable system third party
billing reports in respect of charges, payments and adjustments to individual
student accounts, following up on any outstanding issues to ensure accounts are
cleared out. Deposits on a regular basis all revenue received by the Student
Awards Department, issuing general accounting receipts as necessary, in
conjunction with accounts receivable system billings noted above.
Answers general inquiries and requests for information or forms at the front 20%
reception desk or on the telephone regarding financial assistance programs
available to students, status of student's applications for financial assistance, Short
Term Loan Fund etc., referring more complex inquiries to the staff member
handling such or the Manager.
Performs front counter duties when regular staff member is on lunch or break or 14%
absent. This includes releasing cheques and loans by ensuring students have
appropriate identification and mandatory documents/information, and, as required,
also recalculate OSAP award value in accordance with Ministry policy and
procedures. Prior to releasing any financial assistance, ensure all reassessment
data on file has processed through and been taken into consideration as well as
confirming and remitting outstanding fees via the OSAP loans. Explain general
financial assistance and OSAP policy and procedures to students as requested by
students at counter, issue receipts for cash payment of outstanding student debts,
refer students to other staff as directly requested by students or as required given
change in student's financial or personal situation which involves a more complex
review.
Regularly receives departmental cheque requisitions for delivery to Financial 5%
Services. Verifies appropriate departmental authourization. Receives cheques from
4
Financial Services, matches to requisitions and disperses both to appropriate staff
member.
Liaises with municipal and provincial community and social service agencies 4%
as it relates to student repayment of social assistance funding via OSAP loans.
Receives and records all COMSOC/student assignment letters.
Receives Registrar's Office withdrawal list, verifies against OSAP files/records 4%
and, as necessary, requests tuition fee refunds to Student Awards.
Submits required journal entries and processes related documentation for tuition 3%
fee payment by students receiving Ontario Special Bursary assistance and/or
internal, external awards, scholarships and bursaries.
Liaises with banks as it relates to confirming student OSAP status, forwarding 3%
tuition fee refund loan payments, onsite bank service to students during peak
OSAP releasing etc.
[Other duties } 7%
Note: Percentages may vary according to the time of year.
Accounts Receivable deposits, activity greater during fall and winter semesters
Assisting with other departmental work would be possible during the summer.
The Student Awards Department in which the grievor works is responsible
generally for the administration of various programs under which students obtain
financial assistance. The principal source of funds for students attending the College is
from OSAP, (Ontario Student Awards Program) a system in which students apply for
and, based on eligibility and income and the program that they are in, are granted what is
in essence a right to obtain a loan from certain participating banks - which loan is
guaranteed by the government. In addition, students may seek child care assistance direct
from government and they may apply directly to the College for emergency assistance (to
tide them over until their OSAP money comes in ) from a Short Term Loan Fund.
Further, there is money available to students from private scholarships and bursaries.
5
The process by which OSAP monies are made available to the student is one in
which students, having been advised that their "loan document" (which sets out how
much money they have been awarded) is available, attend at a counter where the
documents are "released" to them. It is their responsibility to take the loan document to
the bank and arrange for a loan of the amount of money that is reflected in the loan
document. The banks, in turn, approve the loans and take from the students' bank
accounts sufficient monies to pay for their tuition and remit those monies back to the
Student Awards Department by cheques payable to the College. However, rather than
send an individual cheque for each student as and when their particular loan has been
negotiated, the banks periodically send out larger cheques covering a number of students
at a time, attaching to the cheque a copy of all of the loan documents to which it applies.
The grievor stated that the cheques could be as high as $150,000.00 and cover up to 160
students. During the peak periods which, comprise approximately a 6 week period in each
of September, January and May these cheques came into the department on a daily basis.
It is one of the grievor's core responsibilities to receive and deposit those cheques
to the College's accounts receivable system and to ensure that each of the students is
credited with the payment of their tuition fees. When students are registered at the
College they are invoiced for their tuition fees and the amount of their tuition appears on
their computerized student records as a debt owed to the College and, upon receipt of the
cheques from the banks, the student's account is credited in the amount of their unpaid
tuition.. What the grievor is required to do is to open up each student record, accessible
on a data base, and apply that portion of the cheque that covers the particular student to
the payment of his or her fees - and to make sure that the amount of the cheque
corresponds to the sum total of all of the separate debts of each of the students covered by
it. Where the bank has, in error, remitted either too much or too little money to the
6
College it is the grievor's responsibility to take the necessary steps to ensure either that
the bank is re-imbursed by a cheque from the College or that the bank remit more money
from the student's account to cover the deficiency.
One of the tasks related to the administration of OSAP loans involved ensuring
that changes in entitlement were properly processed. For example, where the student's
program or financial situation has changed since the original application for OSAP, the
amount of the loan to which he/she was entitled could change in which event it would be
necessary to amend the loan document to notify the bank as to the amount of the loan that
it could negotiate with the student.
In addition to crediting the students' accounts with the OSAP payments the grievor
is required to carry out various other tasks in connection with student financial matters.
As a matter of law students are not entitled to receive both General Welfare Assistance
while they are in receipt of OSAP monies. Where students have been in receipt of such
assistance during the month of September and they subsequently receive their OSAP
money which retroactively covers them beginning in September, it is necessary for the
College to ensure that the City or Municipality providing the welfare is re-imbursed for
this overpayment. For students who are in receipt of Welfare Assistance from the City of
London that is done by the College instructing the banks to remit any such payments
directly to the City of London and deduct it from the amount to be paid to the College.
However, for students from other centres, it was the Student Awards Department that had
to take responsibility for ensuring that the municipal authourities were reimbursed for
welfare overpayment by in essence debiting the student's account in that amount, that is,
adding that to what was already owed by the student to the College for tuition, and
issuing a cheque to the authourities involved. A part of the grievor's job was to enter
7
those debits in the student's file and requisition the cheque.
The grievor also had responsibilities in connection with students who were in
receipt of child care assistance. Such students were required to provide receipts reflecting
their child care expenditures and where that was not done they were required to re-pay the
College. It was the grievor's responsibility to record those credits and debits on the
students accounts.
The grievor testified as to various (daily) interruptions in her work that occurred
while she was carrying out these "accounting" functions. Primarily, these interruptions
came from fellow staff members (both in her department and/or other departments) who
were unsure of what to do with some particular matter and needed some clarification from
someone who knew the system. If these interruptions occurred at a time when she was
separately entering the credits of each of the students covered by a single bank cheque,
and if the interruption took her away from that task for a long enough period of time, the
effect could be to result in the loss of all of her entries to date and the need for her to start
again.
She also spoke of multiple demands which sometimes resulted in unpredictable
work situations and changes in priorities. In addition to the usual unpredictability that
would result from the need to fill in for others who may be absent due to illness, it
appeared that one of the more common examples of this involved the grievor's duties in
connection with students on General Welfare Assistance. Apparently the OSAP money
cannot be released to students until the welfare agencies have been reimbursed for any
monies paid out during a time that a student was entitled to (but perhaps had not yet
received) his/her OSAP monies. As their welfare assistance will have stopped there is
8
thus some need to quickly process these applications in order that students receive their
alternative funding from OSAP. Thus, the grievor was required to postpone some of her
duties in connection with "breaking down" the cheques ( which cheques keep coming in
on a daily basis during the peak periods ) in order to attend to these other more urgent
concerns.
As for her deadlines, she listed the need to provide a "short tum around time" for
welfare as the one which was most critical. As for her other deadlines she listed the need
to deposit the money in the bank as quickly as possible, and the need to process refund
cheques to students (who had withdrawn from the program (or a part of the program) and
were entitled to a refund of some of their paid tuition.
As noted, the PDF states that 40% of the grievor's duties are spent on the various
"accounting" duties that she performs. In addition she spends a portion of her time
answering general inquiries either on a scheduled one day a week basis (20%) or when
relieving others for lunch, breaks or absences (14%). Where she is able to answer the
inquiries from her own knowledge she, of course, does so. However, there may be issues
which are supposed to be referred to others (eg/family breakdown appeals can only go
the supervisor or child care bursary questions go to a designated staff member - whose
various areas on responsibility are set down on a list available to the grievor) and it is the
grievor's responsibility when at the desk to make a determination as to where the question
should be referred in the event that she cannot or ought not to resolve it herself.
The grievor also testified as to various respects in which, while attending at the
reception counter or answering the telephones, she was required to deal with "difficult"
people. As her duties at the reception counter included the releasing of the loan
9
documents to students she would be required to deal with students who, for example,
would object to the College practice of requiring the banks to pay tuition direct to the
College or to the requirement of clearing out any debt to the welfare agencies before
releasing OSAP- rather than leaving it to the student to deal with these matters directly
through payment from out of his/her bank account. Other encounters with students that
involved conflict of some sort included those who were disappointed at the amount of
money that had been approved for loan or whose assessment had changed resulting in a
change in the amount of the loan approved; those whose OSAP release may have been
delayed pending the reimbursement of a welfare agency to whom money was owing; and
those who were required to provide a statement from their Course Co-ordinator that they
were students in good standing before they were entitled to the release of the second
instalment of their loan.
Other people whom the grievor came into contact and whom she characterized as
"difficult" included parents, spouses who wanted information concerning a students'
financial situation and who were unwilling to accept that this information was
confidential and could not be released without the student's consent. Also included in
this category were landlords who could not understand why the College was not prepared
to deduct unpaid rent from the students and remit it directly to them!!!
2. Evaluation and Conclusions
It is appropriate to begin with a brief outline of the classification system which the
parties have agreed to in their Job Evaluation Manual. Section II of the Manual describes
the Guidelines for Evaluation and Classification of positions. The first step is to
determine the Job Family to which the position appropriately belongs. Having done that,
considering the normal activities of the position, the duties and responsibilities of the
10
position being evaluated are compared to the Classification levels described in the Job
Evaluation Guide Chart with a view to finding the level which "most accurately
describes" the content and responsibilities of the position. While it is not anticipated that
a perfect match will be found in all cases it is expected that in most cases a "reasonably
close approximation" to a classification level described in a Guide Chart will be possible
and that it will only be in a "relatively small number of truly atypical positions
encompassing duties and responsibilities which are not adequately covered by the existing
Job Family Definitions and the Job Family Guide Charts, that will be evaluated by the
Core Point Rating Plan.
There is no question that this position falls appropriately in the Clerk General Job
Family the definition for which is: "positions that are involved in clerical or business
machines operating either manually or electronically, or in combination with incidental
typing or stenographic duties."
Nor is there any question that the duties performed by the grievor are analogous to
the typical duties of a Clerk General C as set down in the Classification Guide Charts.
The typical duties of a Clerk General C are:
- Prepares payroll documentation, bank deposits, cash receipt journals and reconciles trial
balances.
- Expedites purchase orders and verifies invoices
- Completes and analyzes documents related to student admission and registration
- Disseminates detailed information in response to a wide range of enquiries
- Gathers and compiles statistical data
- Maintains and verifies various records.
Next, it is necessary to compare the rest of the evaluation criteria in the
Classification Guide charts (omitting for the moment the disputed criteria of
Training/Technical Skills, Judgement, and Strain) with the relevant section of the PDF
11
(and the evidence) to determine the extent to which the position reflects the levels
established for the Clerk General C. In entering upon that comparison it must be
remembered that the Guide Chart descriptions are an attempt to capture, in general
language, the many and various positions that exist across the entire system. It is natural,
therefore, that no fit' will ever be perfect.
1. Experience.. The PDF specifies three years experience in an accounting environment as
the minimum practical experience required - which falls at the outside edge of the range
of 1-3 years set down in the Guide Chart.
2. Complexity. It is clear from both the PDF and the evidence at the hearing that the
grievor's duties involve the same level of complexity as that set down in the guide charts
for Clerk General C, viz, performance of "various routine, complex tasks involving
different and unrelated processes and/or methods".
3. Motor Skills - the PDF states that the grievor is involved in data entry duties for 43%
of the time which brings her squarely within the Clerk General C guide chart standard of
"fine motor movement ...for 31% to 60% of the time."
4. Physical Demand. The guide chart prescribes "some" physical demand where the
employee "has comfortable bodily positions with flexibility of movement" and "light
physical effort". The PDF speaks of "minimum" physical demand and notes that the
incumbent "works in an office environment and has some flexibility to change movement
or physical position."
5. Sensory Demand. The Guide Chart requires that the job duties require "considerable
visual demand and occasional careful attention to detail and accuracy". By way of
comparison the PDF states that the majority of the position's responsibilities require
"considerable visual concentration, attention to detail and accuracy."
6. Independent Action. The PDF states that the incumbent is free to proceed with day to
12
day routines "in accordance with departmental procedures"; lists among the guidelines
available a departmental procedures manual, College policies and Ministry OSAP
procedures manuals and memos"; and states that clerical paperwork is checked by
exception and reception flow problems would be noticed immediately (and presumably
corrected). This compares closely with the Guide Chart standard for this factor under
which duties are performed "in accordance with general procedures and past practices
under periodic supervision with occasional periods of Supervisor input or verification."
7. Communications. It is clear that the kind of communications which the grievor has
with others (students in particular) is of the nature captured by the guide chart levels for
this factor, viz, "for the purpose of providing detailed explanations, clarification, and
interpretation of data or information" with a need to "empathize with and or understand
the needs of others".
8. Responsibility. The PDF states that ineffective interaction with students and the
community would reflect poorly on "integrity and public relations" and that, while "all
errors would likely be discovered" their effect would depend on "whether they could be
corrected or some alternative course of action taken" with the prospect that "public
relations could suffer considerably." This fits well with the Guide Chart description for
this factor which prescribes that decision and actions have a "moderate" impact; that
errors are "usually detected" by verification and review and may result in disruption of
the workflow."
9. Work Environment. The PDF states that the incumbent works in a standard office
environment and has little or no exposure to disagreeable elements with occasional
interaction with volatile clients. By comparison the guide charts state that the job duties
"are carried out with occasional exposure to slightly disagreeable and/or hazardous
elements."
13
Thus, with respect to the Job Family, the list of Typical Duties and with respect to
9 out of 12 of the job factors, the position occupied by the grievor reflects and is
consistent with the Classification Guide Charts for the position of Clerk General C. What
remains for consideration is the 3 disputed factors of Training/Technical Skill, Judgment
and Strain.
1. Training/Technical Skills.
With respect to this factor there can be no question that the position of the College
must prevail. The PDF states that the minimum level of training and technical skill
required is "secondary school graduate with accounting/data entry skills." This
corresponds very closely with that set down in the Guide Charts for the Clerk General C,
viz, "secondary school graduation or equivalent" with job duties requiring an "ability to
apply advanced...arithmetic skills." I note that, although the union sought to claim in its
brief that his position should be rated at level 5, viz, "two year Community College
diploma or equivalent -with ability to organize simple statistical information and to
understand the elementary principles of a ..professional discipline", it did not advance that
position strenuously at the hearing. In my opinion, there is no basis either in the PDF or
in the evidence for that claim and conclude that the more appropriate description is that
set down for the Clerk General C.
2. Judgement.
In support of its position with respect to this factor the union points to the analysis
required when reconciling the debits and credits on the students records in the Accounts
Receivable System. It is suggested that this involves "considerable" as opposed to
"moderate" judgment and problem solving that involves the use of "established analytical
techniques" to resolve a variety of"conventional problems" as opposed to merely the
14
"identification and breakdown of the facts and components of the problem situation."
It is my view that where the PDF itself uses evaluative language which closely or
precisely mirrors that found in the Job Evaluation Plan very close attention should be paid
to it, particularly where, as here, the parties are agreed as to the contents of the PDF.
Under the Judgment factor this PDF speaks of"some analyzation" being required when
depositing tuition fee payments and certain discrepancies appear and "significant
analyzation required when reconciling OSAP third party billing accounts and credit/debit
entries that do not balance off." I note firstly that the term "analysis" itself is used, and
secondly, that in some respects the degree of analysis expected of the grievor is described
as "significant", one of the evaluative terms that is used to separate the different levels
required. (In fact it is "significant" judgment that serves to distinguish level 5 from level
4 in the Core Point Rating plan.) However, the use of the term "analysis" itself is not
conclusive since that term is used in both levels 2 and level 4. The crucial question is
whether or not the analysis that is required is that which requires an "identification and a
breakdown of components" as the College claims, or the use of "established analytical
techniques" as the union claims. In my view the description which more closely
describes the sort of analysis done by the grievor is that proposed by the College. What is
essentially required is a line by line examination of the student's record to find the source
of the discrepancy. I see that as more an identification of the problem - from which
identification the solution suggests itself- rather than the use of some established
analytical technique to solve a problem.
Nor am I persuaded by the union's argument that "considerable" judgment is
required when the grievor finds herself unable to respond to a particular query at the desk
and needs to decide which other staff member should to refer the matter to. The members
15
of the department have reasonably identifiable areas of responsibility and it would not, in
my opinion, require much "judgment" to make this kind of determination, particularly
where there is a list of staff members and areas on responsibility available to the grievor.
3. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines.
With respect to this factor the union refers to the PDF references to "frequent
interruptions and multiple demands" and to work situations being"unpredictable with
shifts in priorities and constant need to meet deadlines. In this instance the PDF has used
language which very closely mirrors that used in the Job Evaluation Plan. Under the Core
Point Rating Plan - level 4 (which is what the union seeks in this case) is appropriate
where the job duties involve "conflicting work pressures and the frequent interruptions in
workflow. Work situations may be unpredictable with shifts in priorities and occasional
critical deadlines.
In my view there is no answer to the union's claim in respect of this factor.
Moreover, it is supported by the evidence.
3. Summary
Whether or not this matter is approached from the standpoint of a comparison of
the position with the Classification Guide Charts or through use of the Core Point Rating
Plan, the grievance must be dismissed.
In terms of the Classification Guide Charts the only one of the evaluative criteria
that has been found to warrant a classification other than that of Clerk General C is that of
Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines. In all other respects it has been found
16
that the appropriate standard is that set out in the Guide Charts for Clerk General C.
Thus, it is clear that the position that "most closely resembles" that held by the grievor
is that of Clerk General C.
Even if the position is considered to be atypical and one that should be core point
rated, it is clear that rating the position at level 4 for the factor of Strain from Work
Pressures/Demands/Deadlines as claimed by the union would not be sufficient to raise
the grievor to payband 7. The total point rating for Clerk General C according to the
Classification Guide Charts is 409 - although in this case the College has rated the factor
of Sensory Demand at one level higher (4 - 39 points) than is indicated in the Guide
charts). Thus, the grievor would need 42 points (or, if the starting point is the College
rating of 420 - 31 points) to reach the payband 7 threshold of 451 points. The difference
_ between level 4 for and level 3 for the factor of Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/
Deadlines is 11 points leaving the grievor far short of the 451 point threshold.
Accordingly, the grievance must be dismissed and the grievor's classification is
confirmed as Clerk General, Payband 6.
¥ £
Dated at LONDON, Ont. this '2,:'? day of /3ji~r~9/~ , 1998
Gregory j. B/,~ndt, Sole Arbitrator
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATION
~nt Classification: ~ L~ (~L~'~ C ~ and Present Payband: ~
Family and Payband Requested by Grievor:~ L~ z'~ 4'~y PI ( ~L ~ 4 ~ ~4~ ~ ~ '
Job
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)
FACTORS MANAOEMENT UNION ARBITRATOR
Level Points Level Points "Level Points
1. Training/Technical Skills
2. Experience
3. Complexity
" Judgement
Motor Skills
6. Physical Demand
7. Sensory Demand
8. Strain from Work Pressures/Demands/Deadlines ~ ~. ~-
9. Independent Action
10. Communications/Contacts
1 1. Responsibility for Decisions/Actions
1 2. Work Environment (/ / (.)
PAYBANDITOTAL POINTS
JOB CLASSIFICATION
ATTACHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: [] The Union [] The College
FOR THE UNION' FOR MANAGEMENT
{Gnevor) (Date) (College Representative) (Date)
(Union Representative) (Date)
.i, t
(Arbitrator' ~' (Date of He'arin~/) (Date of Award)
93-12-09 b:datasheet.doc