Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgard 93-09-23 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: GEORGE BROWN COLLEGE - and - ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF ROY AGARD BOARD OF ARBITRATION: JANE H. DEVLIN CHAIRMAN DAVID W. GUPTILL COLLEGE NOMINEE SHERRIL MURRAY UNION NOMINEE ~,.Jane Smale, for the College Kevin W. Whitaker, for the Union OPSEU FILE NO.: 92F853 HEARING DATE: September 10, 1993 The Grievor, Roy Agard, is classified as a Skilled Trades Worker A at pay band 9 and seek~ reclassification to pay band 11. The parties agreed on the content of the P.D.F. with the exception of the description of the element of visual strain. It was the submission of the Union that the duties of the position entail moderate visual strain between 40% and 60% of the time whereas it was the submission of the College that this degree of visual strain is required only for short periods, 10% to 30% of the time. The factors in dispute are as follows: Factors College Rating Union Rating Job Difficulty D4 E4 Guidance Received D3 D5 Communications C3 D3 Knowledge: Skill 4 5 Working Conditions: Manual Effort C5 D5 Visual Strain B3 B5 Environment C5 D5 2 The Grievor works as a general carpenter at the College's St. James Campus where he performs skilled repair, maintenance and installation work. The Board notes that the Grievor has occupied this position for many years and is an experienced carpenter. The Grievor estimated that approximately 60% of his time is spent performing repairs of items such as furniture, doors, walls, windows and locks. He also spends a considerable amount of time installing items such as chalk boards, bulletin boards, shelving and floor tiles. As well, he makes adjustments to fire doors and performs some cabinetry work. Although, at one time, the Grievor was also involved in renovations, this work is presently contracted out by the College. The Grievor, however, may assist the contractor with respect to the delivery of materials. He is also involved in maintaining stock and in making recommendations as to stock purchases. The Grievor performs some of his work alone although, in most cases, because of the nature of the job, he is assisted by a Handyman. From time to time, the Grievor also works with other tradesmen and, as a result, he has gained some knowledge of trades other than carpentry. The Grievor is assigned the bulk of his work by way of work orders which are provided to him either by the Lead Head or 3 the Campus Manager. In some instances, the Grievor also notices that particular items require repair, in which case, he performs the necessary work and then arranges for the appropriate work order to be initialled by the Lead Hand. He follows a similar procedure in relation to work he performs at the request of College staff although if a significant amount of work is involved, he may refer the staff member to the Campus Manager for the purpose of obtaining a work order. On occasion, the Grievor also assists students with locker repairs. In carrying out his work, the Grievor uses various tools, including drills and saws which are located in the shop. He also uses a variety of materials, some of which he transports to his work location by means of a wagon. When moving heavier materials, such as bulletin boards or drywall, he is assisted by a Handyman. The Grievor explained, however, that he rarely transports large sheets of drywall as currently, he performs little construction work. Some of the Grievor's work, such as furniture repair, is performed in the shop and the balance, at other work locations throughout the campus. Most of the work is performed inside although, on occasion, the Grievor is required to work outdoors. On an infrequent basis, he is also assigned to the plant room which he described as noisy and to the baker's shop which is hot. As well, the Grievor frequently performs work on ladders and he 4 generally uses an 8 foot ladder or a step ladder. Only rarely does he work on scaffolding. In carrying out his work, the Grievor also wears certain protective equipment, including eye goggles, gloves and safety shoes. It is necessary, then, to consider the factors in dispute: 1. Job Difficulty In respect of this factor, the parties agree that the Grievor's position is properly rated at level 4 in the element of judgement but disagree as to the appropriate rating for the element of complexity. In the Board's view, both the evidence and the P.D.F. indicate that while the Grievor's work involves the performance of varied, non-routine, complex tasks, these tasks are typical of those which would commonly be assigned to a skilled carpenter. In this context, therefore, the tasks cannot be described as "relatively unusual", nor can it be said that they require the application of specialized processes and methods as is necessary for a rating at level E. In the result, in the element of complexity, the Board finds that the position is properly rated at level D. 5 2. Guidance Received The parties agree that in the element of guidelines available, the appropriate rating is level D in that work is performed in accordance with past practices which may be adapted or modified to meet particular situations and/or problems. The Grievor's Supervisor is also available to assist in resolving problems. As to nature of review, while it does not appear that the Grievor's Work assignments are regularly checked for quality, we believe that this is due, in large part, to the Grievor's experience in the position and the fact that he appears to be a particularly conscientious employee. Nevertheless, as noted in other cases, it is not the incumbent but the requirements of the position which must be evaluated. Moreover, in respect of this element, the Board notes that in view of the nature of the work performed, in many instances, deficiencies would be evident to supervision simply by walking around the campus and, therefore, would not necessitate that special checks be conducted. In the result, the Board is not prepared to alter the present rating at level 3. 6 3. Communications While there is no dispute about the rating in the element of level of contacts, the parties disagree as to the appropriate rating for the element of purpose of contacts. In the Board's view, both the evidence and the P.D.F. indicate that the Grievor's work primarily involves contacts for the purpose of providing guidance, instruction or technical advice which is consistent with a rating at level C. 4. EnQwledge In respect of the element of skill, the Board finds that the Grievor's work does not require the ability to organize Complex statistical information and to understand and apply elementary principles of a science or professional discipline which is necessary for a rating at level 5. Moreover, although the Grievor uses a variety of tools, he does not operate very complex electronic instruments, laboratory or computer equipment. In the result, the Board is not prepared to alter the present rating at level 4. 7 5. Working Conditions In this case, the parties disagree on the rating for each of the three elements; namely, manual effort, visual strain and work environment. Dealing firstly with manual effort, the parties disagree as to whether, on a continuous basis, the Grievor's position requires moderate, rather than heavy, manual effort. In this regard, the Board finds that while the Grievor is required, from time to time, to handle heavy materials, for the most part, his work involves moderate manual effort and physical exertion, including working from ladders, using medium weight tools and handling medi%~m weight materials. In the result, the position is properly rated at level C5. As to the element of visual strain, the parties agree that moderate visual concentration is required and that the Grievor must focus on small areas or objects for short periods of time i.e., up to one hour. It would appear that this occurs primarily when the Grievor performs lock repairs as the mechanisms are both small and delicate. While the evidence indicates that such work is performed almost daily, the amount of time spent varies with the nature of the repair. The Grievor also testified that he is often interrupted or has to go in 8 search of parts. In the result, the rating in this element shall remain unchanged at level 3. The final element in dispute is work environment. In respect of this element, the Board finds that while the Grievor wears protective equipment, this alone is not sufficient to warrant a rating at the D level. As to the other requirements of this level, the Board notes that the Grievor is rarely exposed to extreme cold, heat or fumes and although he works on ladders, he generally uses an 8 foot ladder or a step ladder. Moreover, while he is exposed to conditions where there is some possibility of injury, we do not find that there is a distinct possibility of injury which is characteristic of a rating at level D. In this element, therefore, the appropriate rating is level C5. In the result, for the reasons set out, the Board finds that the position is properly rated at the levels proposed by the College and, accordingly, the grievance of Mr. Agard is dismissed. DATED AT TORONTO, this 23rd day of September, 1993. Chairman "David W, Guptill" College Nominee "Sherril Murray" Union Nominee