Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKuest 88-01-28 IN THE MATTER OF A CLASSIFICATION ARBITRATION BETWEEN: OPSEU (NORBERT KUEST) - AND - GEORGE BROWN COLLEGE APPEARANCES For the Union Nancy Coughlan, Union Representative For the College Sally Layton January 20, 1988 AWARD This is a job classification grievance under the Colleges Support Staff Expedited Arbitration procedures. The issues in this case were well focused because of the parties' agreement on the contents of the Position Description Form. However, the Union raised a preliminary concern at the outset of the hearing as to whether the position was properly classified as "Atypical" or whether it should be a Clerk General with a Day band 6. Since that issue involved a question of negotiating history and because the issue is academic since the grievor no longer holds the position, it was agreed that this aspect of the case would not be pursued by the Union in this case. Therefore, we proceed on the basis that we were reviewing the 'position of the clerk in the Purchasing Department with a current classificatin of Atypical Clerk 293. The agreed summary of the grievor's responsibilities is as follows: The incumbent reports to the Manager of Purchsing and as reponsible for: upon review and completion by the Buyer as to acceptable supplier, price, extensions, delivery, terms etc. , processing approximately 7,000 requisitions and other clerical duties of the Purchasing Department as descriDed in duties and responsibili ties. There were only four items in dispute between the parties and the award shall deal with them in order: 1. Job Difficulty Complex i ty The grievor describes his tasks as other than routine and requiring constant, detailed scrutiny by him of his own work as well as the work he receives which is prepared by others. The College desscribes the job as involving a number of routine tasks and a great deal of data entry. The Union seeks a C3 rating. The College asserts a B2 rating is appropriate. I am convinced by the grievor t~hat his duties do require a "moderate degree of judgment" and "analysis for problem solving" particularly where there is difficulty retrieving information from the copmuter. He is also required to perform different unrelated processes, such as work upon a computsr, type, compile statistics and assist Purchasing staff. Therefore, I assign the rate of C3 (122 points) to the position. 2. Guidance Received The grievor alleges he works on his own and that only minimum review is necessary. He also asserts that he works in accordance with general procedures and past practices.. The College asserts that the 9rievor simply works in accordance with establist'~ed practices. - 3 - The parties agree that the work is intermittently checked for quality. The Union is seeking a C3 rating. The College is asserting a B3 rating. The evidence convinces me that the work is performed in accordance~ with established practices. It did not appear to be work that would be covered by "general procedures". Therefore, I rate the position at B3 (79 points). 3. Communications The grievor testified that he was called upon to provide detailed information on Purchase Orders to customs brokers and department heads. He was also called .~pon to explain purchase order policy and recognize and refer budgetary problems to appropriate sources. The grievor claims that this requires a significant amount of communication skills. .The College asserts that when the grievor dealt with customs Drokers he was working outside of his job description. In any event, it was asserted that the grievor was only ever required to ~iv,e out factual information. The Union is seeking a B3 rating while the College is asserting that an A3 rating is more appropriate. I am not convinced that the grievor was called upon to provide "detailed explanations" as contemplated by a B rating. He'did, within his job description, give detailed factual information' to those who required it or requested it. This involved the ability to retrieve and relay factual date as well as the ability to discuss it. But this falls within the A3 rating. Thus, I rate the position at A3 (35 points). 4. Knowledge The Position Description Form requires "three years general office experience". The Union claims that this means the position falls within the "experienced matrix" at Level D of "up to five years practical experience." The basis for the Union's claim is that the Level C's requirement of "up to three years practical experience" means three years less one day. Otherwise, the Union claims the matrix would ~ead "up to and including three years." The Union asserts that the ordinary and practical meaning of the matrix is that Level C includes three years of experience. This is a question of interpretation. The reading of the experience chart as a whole compels an acceptance of the College's position. Level A requires little or no practical experience. Level B req.~ires "up to one year's experience." Therefore, at the end of one year of experience, one qualifies at Level B. Level F refers to "more than a year's experience", while Level E is "up to B years." Therefore, clearly 8 years of experience must be gaine~ before moving to Level F. Therefore, the scale means the experience factor advances once the 8th year is completed. Therefore, the scale contemplates the completion of each year of ~_he specified years. Therefore, "up to three years of practical experience" means up to and including three years of experience. The requirements of this position is squarely within Level C. Therefore the job is rated at C3 (64 points). Conclusion The above analysis has added 57 points to the College's original rating of the position. The revised rating and total points are set forth in the attached Core Point Rating Plan Summary. The position is re-evaluated as a result of this award to Pay Band 5 effective June 1, 1986 until August 3, 1987, at which time the 9rievor undertook another position. The grievor is to be paid all retroactive monies that result from the new evaluation together with interest calculated in the usual manner: This Board of Arbitration remains seized with all matters regarding the implementation of this award. DATED ak Toronto, this 23th day of January, 1985. Paula Knopf COLLEGE George Brown College · ~ CORE..POINT RATING PLAN - SUMMARY EVALUATION FORM POSITION Clerk - Purchasing Dept REPORTS TITLE ' TO Manager of Purchasing (TITLE) CURRENT. CLASSIFICATION Atypical Clerk 293 EFFECTIVE DATE September 10, 1987 DATE OF OF P.D.F. EVALUATION FACTOR COMMENTS DEGREE POINTS Revised by Arbitration C3 122 JOB DIFFICULTY GUIDANCE RECEIVED Status quo B3 79 COMMUNICATIONS " " A3 35 ~RAINING " " C3 64 & EXPER. ~NOWLEDGE SKILL Agreement of Parties 3 34 MANUAL .... " A5 3 EFFORT WORKING CONDITIONS VISUAL .... " B4 10 .ENVIR. " " " A5 3 EVALUATED BY: TOTAL POINTS Paula Knopf 350 Expedited Arbitration PAY BAND January 20, 1988 5