Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPorco, Matallo 98-04-02., IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION ~47~7 BETWEEN: GEORGE BROWN COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY ("the college") and ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION ("the umon") AND IN THE MATTER OF CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCES OF ALDO MATALLO AND RODOLFO PORCO (OPSEU #95B664 AND #95B708) BOARD OF ARBITRATION: Ian Springate, Chair Kevin Mailloux, College Nominee Sandra Nicholson, Union Nominee APPEARANCES For the College: Andrea F. Raso, Counsel Regina Lapworth, Director, Labour relations For the Union: George Richards, Senior Grievance Officer Sam Reid, Steward HEARINGS: In Toronto on October 16, 1996; April 24; June 25; December 1, 1997 2 AWARD INTRODUCTION The grievors are based at the college's Casa Loma campus, although at times they are assigned to two other campuses. The college classifies them as general maintenance workers and rates them at the pay band 7 level. The applicable job evaluation system indicates that pay band 7 is the appropriate pay level for a typical general maintenance worker. On November 16, 1994 Mr. Matallo filed a grievance which claimed that he ~should be classified as an atypical employee and paid at the pay band 9 level. Mr. Porco filed a similarly worded grievance on February 9, 1995 At the hearing the representative of the union contended that the college did not give the grievors credit for times when they were called upon to do the work of a skilled trades worker. He submitted that 15 tasks assigned to the grievors had been identified during the heating as tasks typically assigned to skilled trades workers. He noted that under the job evaluation system skilled tradespersons are typically rated at pay band 9, although certain skilled trades workers at the college were rated at pay band 11. He contended that while the grievors did not perform the high end tasks that would justify pay band 11, they did perform tasks within the range of a normal skilled trades worker such as to justify pay band 9. 3 THE NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE RELATING TO THE GRIEVORS' DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Neither grievor testified in these proceedings. The two witnesses who did testify seldom observed the grievors performing their work assignments. A position description form relating to the classification of general maintenance workers was prepared by the college. The accuracy of the form was, however, challenged by the umon. A number of sheets listing duties that were assigned to skilled trades workers and general maintenance workers on an overtime basis were filed into evidence. Similar sheets were not available for assignments during regular working hours. The overtime sheets indicate that at times a grievor and a skilled trades worker were assigned to the same duty. At other times, however, a grievor, or the two gdevors together, were assigned to a task without a skilled trades worker. Evidence respecting the grievors' duties and responsibilities was given by Mr. Sam Reid. When the grievances were filed Mr. Reid was a maintenance lead hand. He was based at the Casa Loma campus but also had responsibilities relating to the Nightingale and Kensington campuses. Mr. Reid was a sheet metal worker by trade who held a master's licence in heating and air conditioning. He was also a union steward. Mr. Reid retired from the college's employ in December 1996. One of Mr. Reid's primary responsibilities was to assign work to both skilled trades workers and general maintenance workers. During regular working hours he did so orally or through written work orders. If a work order was utilized the document would later be returned to Mr. Reid marked with a "C" to indicate that the work had been completed. Evidence was also given by Mr, Michael McGee, the management person to whom Mr. Reid and the grievors reported. Mr. McGee became campus manager at the Casa Loma campus in 1985 after being the assistant manager since 1974. He assumed responsibility for general maintenance workers and skilled trades workers in or about 1993. Mr. McGee indicated that his training had been as a drafting technician and he had worked at the college as a technician from 1971 to 1974. THE GRIEVORS' QUALIFICATIONS No direct evidence was led respecting the grievors' formal education or training. Mrl Reid testified that Mr. Matallo had worked for several years as a bricklayer technician at the college and his understanding was that Mr. Matallo had taught bricklaying courses. This suggests that Mr. Matallo may have been a qualified bricklayer or a mason tender. Mr. McGee's evidence was that the gfievors did not possess certificates of qualification. It is clear form the evidence that while classified as a general maintenance worker Mr. Matallo was not employed as a bricklayer. Indeed there was only one situation referred to in the evidence where Mr. Matallo did any brick work. This was on April 25, 1993 when he repaired a planter box that had been built of brick. Some of the top bricks had come lose. Mr. McGee testified that Mr. Matallo took off the old mortar and relaid the loose bricks. Both of the grievors held a gas fitter licence. Mr. Reid testified that such a licence was required for a general maintenance worker at the Casa Loma campus. Mr. McGee testified that after being hired the gdevors on their own initiative had taken continuing 5 education courses to obtain gas fitter licences. At least one of the mechanics employed by the college also held such a licence. Mr. McGee testified that there was seldom any work at the college that required a gas fitter licence. He stated that the last time this had occurred was a couple of years ago when new boilers were installed. He said that Mr. Matallo had been involved with the installation although he did not recall Mr. Porco being present and he did not know if Mr. Porco had as yet acquired his liCence. Mr. Reid testified that the grievors assisted a mechanic during the pre-season servicing of boilers which involved dismantling the gas piping and cleaning the robes and also reinstalling the piping and testing the gas piping for leaks. According to Mr. Reid, this work required a gas fitter licence. He stated that a grievor might be working at one end of the boiler while the mechanic worked on the other end. Counsel for the college asked Mr. Reid if the gdevors had ever installed gas piping. He replied that they had done so in jewellery arts, although he could not recall when this had occurred. THE RATINGS OF SKILLED TRADES WORKERS The job evaluation system indicates that in the normal course skilled trades workers will be rated at pay band 9. A painter at the college was in fact rated at pay band 9 although mechanics, electricians and a plumber were rated at pay band 11. It appears that a carpenter was rated at pay band 10. No direct evidence was led as to what considerations had led to these particular ratings. 6 In response to questions fxom the representative of the union, Mr. McGee stated that he did not know what had led to the higher ratings for the skilled trades workers. He noted that he was not on a committee that had rated the positions. Mr. McGee did, however, refer to certain functions listed in the complexity section of a position description form for electricians which he felt went beyond the typical duties of an electrician. These were analysing load sharing of the electrical distribution system in relation to building occupancy levels; and assisting in the planning and layout of facilities and grounds electrical equipment. Mr. McGee agreed with the union representative that these tasks represented a small part of an electrician's work. Mr. McGee indicated that he felt the mechanics had received a higher rating due to their role in estimating for plant installation projects when modifications were necessary. He said that the mechanics did not spend a lot of time on this duty. When asked about the plumber, Mr. McGee stated that he guessed the higher rating was due to the plumber's involvement in the design and installation of plumbing and drainage systems, as well as providing advice to contractors concerning the specifics of college plumbing, piping and drainage systems. The relevant position description form indicates that these duties took up approximately 5 percent of the plumber's time on an annual basis. The representative of the union submitted that the skilled trades workers did not spend much time on the tasks which Mr. McGee thought had warranted pay band 11. Accordingly, he stated, it does not take a lot in terms of responsibility to warrant moving an employee to an atypical status in a higher pay band. He argued that if a bit of extra responsibility could move skilled trades workers up two pay bands, the 15 skilled tasks performed by the gfievors should have the same effect for them. He submitted that a job is not rated according to its lower end functions but rather its high end functions. He contended that since the tasks in issue were typical tasks for a normal skilled trades worker, the ratings given to a normal skilled trades worker should be given to the grievors. THE NATURE OF THE GRIEVORS' WORK AND THE IMPACT OF THEM PERFORMING TASKS ALSO PERFORMED BY SKILLED TRADES WORKERS Mr. Reid testified that over the period of his employment with the college, which began in 1978, there had been a change in the use of general maintenance workers. He stated that at one time most skilled trades workers had a general maintenance worker as an assistant, but over the years with attrition and people not being replaced more responsibility was placed on the general maintenance workers to perform skilled trades work. The evidence of both Mr. McGee and Mr. Reid indicated that between March · 1993 and November 1994 the only relevant change in staffing was the retirement of a painter and his replacement by a motor mechanic who had been on layoff. It appears that after these changes the following skilled trades workers received job assignments from Mr. Reid, namely three mechanics, two electricians, one plumber and one carpenter. The representative of the union asked Mr. Reid how he had utilized general maintenance workers. Mr. Reid indicated that if there was no plumber, painter or carpenter on site, then depending on the nature of the work he might assign the grievors to perform their duties. Mr. Reid gave the example of assigning a general maintenance worker if a toilet would not flush or was blocked and no plumber was available. 8 Mr. McGee testified that 90 percent of the grievors' time was taken up in general work such as changing light bulbs, filters and ballasts; putting up cork boards and blackboards; replacing floor tiles that had come up; and patching drywall. Prior to Mr. McGee giving this evidence counsel for the college advised Mr. Reid that this would be the nature of Mr. McGee's evidence. Mr. Reid replied that he was the one who assigned jobs, not Mr. McGee, and while this type of work represented some of the jobs performed by the grievors it was not 90 percent. College counsel then asked Mr. Reid if he could give his own estimate. Mr. Reid replied that he could not. Mr. McGee testified that for 90 percent of the time the gdevors engaged in the tasks described above, and that during the remaining 10 percent they assisted skilled trades workers. Mr. Reid disagreed with the 10 percent figure. He contended that it might be 2.5 percent of the time. Mr. Reid stated that a general maintenance worker might assist an electrician when there was a problem on a fire alarm system by staying at a panel with a walkie talkie, following the electrician's instructions, and advising the electrician of what was happening at the panel. He also said that about once a year a grievor might assist an electrician or a mechanic in removing a 20 horsepower motor from its mountings so that it could be repaired. The evidence as a whole, including the evidence summarized below, indicates that the grievors generally performed relatively unskilled job functions, although at times they performed tasks that were also assigned to skilled trades workers. Contrary to the submissions of the representative of the union, this by itself does not justify classifying the grievors on the same basis as typical skilled trades workers. Position description forms for a number of skilled trades, as well as regulations respecting the trade qualifications for an electrician, painter-decorator, general carpenter and plumber were filed at the hearing. These documents indicate that skilled trades workers are expected to 9 be able to perform a wide range of functions, not all of which require the same level of skill, training or experience. The fact that an individual can perform some of the lesser skilled functions associated with a trade does not logically mean that he or she should be given the same ratings as a typical fully qualified trades worker. The trade regulations indicate that a certificate of qualification in a trade is usually acquired by serving a lengthy apprenticeship during which an individual receives on the job training as well as formal instruction during several sessions at a college of applied arts and technology. The regulations also indicate that typically a starting apprentice is paid 40 percent of a qualified tradesperson's rate and this percentage rises in stages throughout the apprenticeship. Presumably the staged increases reflect the fact that over time an apprentice will come to master the more highly skilled aspects of the trade and thereby become more valuable to an employer. The job evaluation system clearly establishes that a general maintenance worker can be assigned to functions associated with a particular trade without thereby becoming entitled to be paid on the same basis as a skilled trades worker. The defmition of the general maintenance worker job family makes specific reference to tasks associated with the skilled trades. The full definition reads as follows: This family covers positions that 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. In addition, the job evaluation job chart for general maintenance worker lists as typical duties of this classification the building of cupboards and the installation of locks and notice boards. These are functions associated with the carpentry trade. The guide 10 chart lists painting as being another typical duty of a general maintenance worker. This is a task associated with the trade of painter-decorator. Notwithstanding this overlap, the job classification system indicates that a typical general maintenance worker who performs these tasks is to be rated at pay band 7. Having regard to these considerations, we conclude the fact the grievors performed certain functions also performed by skilled trades workers did not place them in the same position as a skilled trades worker for rating purposes. We recognize that for non-compulsory trades such as carpentry, a combination of informal training and experience may enable an individual to master the full range of skills and knowledge associated with the trade, even though he or she does not possess a certificate of qualification. Should the college employ such an individual and assign him or her to the same range of duties and responsibilities as others in the trade, that individual would logically be entitled to be paid at the same wage rate. The evidence indicates that the grievors received training from skilled trades workers at the college with respect to a number of tasks. These tasks, however, did not represent the full scope of any one trade but rather related to tasks associated with a number of different trades. The representative of the union suggested that the gfievors had performed the full range of a painter's duties when working on an office to be used by Mr. McGee. Mr. McGee indicated that his new office had been part of a former board room and the work had included putting up a wall with a door, as well as installing electrical outlets and some new fixtures. Mr. Reid testified that the grievors assisted the carpenter to put up metal studs for the new wall, and the grievors then installed the drywall, including doing the taping and applying a compound. He stated that the ghevors then sanded and prepared the drywall for painting. He said that the grievors also obtained the paint that was used since paint previously ordered by the carpenter was either the wrong type or the wrong colom. Mr. Reid said that he assumed that the glievors had applied the paint to the drywall as well as to concrete block walls in the office area. He indicated that this was the only incident he could recall where the ghevors had performed work on this scale as opposed to patching or replacing a sheet of drywall and then painting it. Mr. McGee testified that the work on his new office was performed in August and September 1995, after the two grievances had been filed. He stated that the ghevors worked on his office under the direction of Mr. S. IannzTi, an electrician, and Mr. Dunne, the carpenter, and that Mr. Ianuzzi and Mr. Dtmne had been responsible for costing the job. He also said that the painting had been done under the supervision of Mr. Dunne. McGee indicated that at about the time the grievances were filed the only painter employed by the college had retired. He stated that since then contractors had done most of the painting except for touch ups. He said that the grievors had never performed large jobs such as painting a corridor. The evidence suggests that when working on Mr. McGee's office the grievors performed a number of functions associated with the trade of painter-decorator, including taping and applying compound to an entire wall of drywall; selecting the paint, to be used; and painting a large area of drywall and concrete block. The position description form for the painter indicates that there were a variety of other tasks the painter performed, including preparing for and painting ceilings, doors, pipes and ducts and preparing and mixing paints to colour chips. Even without taking these other functions into account, however, we do not view the work the grievors did on Mr. McGee's office as justification 12 for treating them as if they were on a par with a qualified painter-decorator. The evidence indicates that the work the gfievors performed on Mr. McGee's office was a one time event which differed substantially from other situations when the grievors did painting and related work. One of the most difficult issues associated with classification grievances is deciding whether a task not performed on a regular basis should be taken into account when rating an employee's position. That issue, however, does not arise with respect to the work on Mr. McGee's office. Logically the rating of a position should not be based on a single nonrecurring event. The fact that the gfievors performed certain tasks that were also performed by qualified trades workers does not by itself justify rating them on the same basis as a qualified trades worker. A quite separate and distinct issue, however, is whether the performance of these and other tasks, when considered together with other aspects of the grievors' employment, justified rating their positions at a higher level than the rating given by the college. PLUMBING DUTIES PERFORMED BY THE GRIEVORS Mr. Reid referred to a number of tasks which he said would normally be assigned to the plumber, or to the plumber assisted by a grievor, but which he assigned to the grievors when the plumber was not available. He gave the example of a toilet which would not flush and which required the replacement of a diaphragm on the flushometer. He indicated that a grievor performed this duty at least once a week. Mr. Reid testified that the replacement of a diaphragm involved mining off the water by taming a valve or screw, removing the cap on the flushometer, removing the diaphragm by unscrewing it, 13 and then putting in a new one. Mr. McGee in his evidence indicated that Mr. Matallo had been assigned to work on flushometers after being shown how to do the work by the plumber. He stated that he felt Mr. Metallo had not performed this work very often. Mr. Reid testified that the grievors changed cracked vacuum breakers that would cause a flushometer not to work He also referred to the grievors replacing a part of a faucet on a washstand. Mr. Reid testified that if a plumber was not available the grievors would operate an electrically powered snake to clear a floor drain. According to Mr. Reid, the snake had 10 foot length extensions which could be joined together to be 200 feet long. He said that generally the snake was fitted with a four inch diameter cutter. Mr. McGee indicated that the grievors had been assigned to snake floor drains under the direction of a plumber and thereby had learned how to do it. He said that the grievors spent between 5 and 10 percent of their time snaking drains. He subsequently stated that Mr. Matallo had performed this work maybe twice a month and Mr. Porco had performed it once or twice as well. Mr. Reid testified that in order to get at drains the grievors at times had to remove urinals from the wall, which involved removing bolts holding them to the wall. He testified that on one occasion the grievors replaced the main line of a drain which had lines coming off to six urinals. He stated that to do this work the grievors had to break the wall with a hammer; cut out a length of pipe; install another length of pipe and T fittings; solder the connections to the urinals; and reinstall the urinals. Mr. Reid testified that he had assigned Mr. Matallo to repair a corroded main line at a building on Kendal Avenue when the plumber originally assigned to do the work on an overtime basis did not show up. Mr. Reid stated that he could not recall when this had occurred. MECHANICS' DUTIES Mr. Reid in his evidence referred to work performed on an automatic air filter system. He testified that this work had previously been done by mechanics but more recently he had assigned the work to general maintenance workers to do every three months. Mr. Reid subsequently stated that between the spring of 1993 and the fall of 1994 the work was being performed by mechanics 50 percent of the time and by general maintenance workers 50 percent of the time. He stated that the work entailed greasing the bearings of the cog wheels, changing automatic filter rolls and servicing an automatic eye so that it operated properly. In response to a subsequent question by counsel for the college, Mr. Reid stated that the gdevors were assigned to replace filters on the automatic system about twice a year. Mr. McGee described the filters as being on a roll. He said that the work involved taking off an old roll, putting on a new one, and feeding it through to connect to a take-up roll. He said that although he had not seen the work being performed, it had been done by general maintenance workers ever since he became the campus manager. Mr. McGee also said that he would have thought that Mr. Reid would have a mechanic grease the bearings and do the servicing work while assigning filter changes to a general maintenance worker. Based on Mr. Reid's evidence, we conclude that the grievors were at times assigned to grease the bearings and service the automatic eye. Mr. Reid testified that general maintenance workers would at least twice a year change the filters on eleven general ventilation units located on the roof at 160 Kendal Avenue. According to Mr. Reid, if while changing a filter a general maintenance worker identified that a fan belt on a four belt pulley wheel was cracked or had become worn, he would replace all four belts with the same type of belt; ensure that the new belts were properly lined up using a string or straight edge; ensure that the tension was okay; test it; and then advise Mr. Reid that the belts had been changed. Mr. Reid stated that the gfievors did not change fan belts very often. Mr. Reid described changing filters as a semi-skilled function and changing the belts, which was normally done by a mechanic, as skilled work. In response to questions from counsel for the college, Mr. Reid stated that he felt a licence was needed to perform this work. He also indicated that the grievors would not just replace a fan bek but had to identify whether its condition was caused by wear and tear or from not being aligned properly. Mr. Reid indicated that if the cause of the problem was that the groove in a pulley wheel was worn, which could be seen by the depth of the belt on the pulley, the ghevors would report the matter to him and he would assign a mechanic to address the situation. Mr. McGee stated that replacing the belts on the general ventilation units involved shutting down the trait; loosening bolts on the motor so as to take away the tension; removing the worn belts and installing new ones; getting the tension back; and then tightening the bolts. He indicated that the work was generally done by mechanics when they were doing their rounds and checking everything out. Mr. McGee stated that a general maintenance worker could perform the task once shown how to do it. He described changing the belts as a semi-skilled function. He differentiated it from other tasks which required analysis and which might require replacing a motor or pullies. 16 Mr. Reid testified that general maintenance workers assisted the mechanics in cleaning supplementary heating coils. He added that there might be eight coils in a room and a mechanic would work at one end of the room while the general maintenance worker worked at the other end. He indicated that the coils got plugged up with dust and dirt and were cleaned at least once a year. He stated that the dirt was scraped out of the coils and then removed with a vacuum, and the coil was then cleaned using a liquid acid and cold water. Mr. Reid indicated that at times a coil would be blocked solid and have to be removed and replaced by a mechanic. Mr. McGee stated that the cleaning of coils involved blowing out an accumulation of dust. He said that a general maintenance worker would clean heating coils while working in the same room as a mechanic. He also said that mechanics dealt with any leaks in the coils. Mr. Reid testified that if the mechanics were not available he would assign the grievors to remove heat pumps that were to be taken to a shop for repair and to later reinstall them. He said that a lifter was required for this work because the pumps were suspended above the ceiling. He described the work as including shutting down the water supply and dismantling and later reinstalling the sheet metal duct work. He said that the power would usually be disconnected by an electrician. According to Mr. Reid, the actual repair work at the shop was done by a refrigeration mechanic. Mr. Reid testified that removing heat pumps at 146 Kendal Avenue was a daily chore, although later he said that it was done every other week. He stated that the work was performed by the grievors about 50 percent of the time and by mechanics the rest of the time. Mr. McGee's evidence was that the grievors generally removed and reinstalled heat pumps three or four times a year, although in some years it might have been seven or eight times and in "a real lucky year" it might have happened only once. Mr. McGee agreed with the representative of the union that the units were heavy and had to be handled carefully. He disagreed with the suggestion that this made it a skilled job. Evidence relating to the grievors' work on boilers is discussed above in the context of their gas fitter licences. ELECTRICAL WORK Mr. Reid's evidence was that he would assign the gfievors to change light bulbs and if while doing this work they noticed a ballast was defective they were expected to change it. He indicated that generally this required mining off the power at the appropriate breaker in an electrical panel, although for some ballasts the work could be done without mining off the power. Mr. Reid identified an overtime sheet for the weekend of May 14 and 15, 1994 which stated that Mr. Matallo was to assist Mr. Ianmtzzi, an electrician, in replacing ballasts. According to Mr. Reid the work was in a library where up to 60 ballasts needed replacing. He stated that the work could have involved Mr. Iannuzzi working at one end of the room and Mr. Matallo at the other end. Mr. Reid referred to another overtime sheet for the weekend of April 31 and May 1, 1994 when Mr. Iannuzzi and Mr. Matallo were again assigned to replace ballasts. He testified that he had walked through the room and observed the two of them changing ballasts in different parts of the room. Mr. Reid indicated that as far as he was concerned changing ballasts was the work of an electrician. He also said that the work of changing ballasts had been assigned to general maintenance workers since he came to the college. Mr. McGee testified that the task of changing ballasts can be learned by watching a trades worker perform the task a couple of times. He described it as mining off the breaker to disconnect the power; taking off the lens if there was one; taking off the tube; disconnecting the outer housing; disconnecting the connections on the wiring; unscrewing the ballast from the fixture; and then screwing in a new ballast. Mr. McGee estimated that the grievors spent five to ten percent of their time changing ballasts. FLOOR WORK Mr. Reid referred to an overtime assignment sheet respecting work assigned to the grievors during the 1994 labour day weekend. The assignment called for them to perform duties at 160 Kendal Avenue which included patching a hole in a concrete floor; replacing some floor tiles; removing signs from an exterior wall; removing eye bolts from a floor where video games used to be; and installing a welcome banner on a balcony railing. According to Mr. McGee, the eye bolts were removed by unscrewing them. Mr. Reid stated that from his observation of the area he knew that the gdevors had repaired the floor where the eye bolts had been. Mr. Reid testified that to patch a hole in a concrete floor requires cleaning the area with a rub brush, preparing the cement, pouting the cement, and then smoothing it over with cement trowels. In response to a later question from counsel for the college, Mr. Reid stated that he did not know whether the gfievors had been assisted in this work by 19 Mr. Crean the painter and by Mr. Dunne the carpenter. Mr. Reid described patching a hole in a concrete floor and the replacement of floor tiles as skilled work that would normally be performed by a bricklayer or a cement finisher. He stated that both grievors had replaced floor tiles, although it did not happen very frequently. DRYWALL REPAIR Mr. McGee stated that the campus had a lot of studems with steel toed boots who got aggravated around exam time. Mr. Reid's evidence was that students frequently kicked holes in drywall and that the repair of drywall was a normal part of the duties of a general maintenance worker. He indicated that usually the carpenter did the drywall installation and when the college employed a painter he did the taping and patching. An overtime sheet for the weekend of October 16 and 17, 1993 indicated that Mr. Matallo and Mr. Service, another general maintenance worker, had been assigned to repair some damaged drywall. Mr. Reid stated that this work might have involved either patching a hole or replacing a drywall sheet. He indicated that if it had involved patching it could have been done in one day, but if it involved replacing a drywall sheet it would have required taping and about three applications of a compound, which would have taken several days. When being cross-examined by counsel for the college Mr. Reid testified that the work may have required half a drywall sheet in which case the gfievors would have fit the drywall, taped the .joints, applied three coats of a compound, and on the third day sanded it down. 20 CARPENTRY WORK Mr. Reid testified that the grievors had been assigned certain work that was also performed by the carpenter. He included in this the mounting of blackboards and bulletin boards. Mr. Reid described mounting a blackboard as a skilled job. Mr. McGee acknowledged that the grievors as well as the carpenter regularly did this work. Mr. Reid testified that the grievors repaired doors that had jammed and required planing and when a handicapped door would not open they took the cover off the mechanism and repaired it. He stated that they had also repaired drawers and doors on office furniture. According to Mr. Reid, the grievors repaired locks that were jammed or had a broken key in the lock. He said that they had taken lock sets apart, repaired them, and then reinstalled them. He indicated that if the grievors were unsuccessful in repairing a lock, a locksmith would be called in. Mr. McGee testified that the grievors might have replaced the track of a drawer; glued the edge of a desk that had come lose; screwed legs back on a metal desk; and when the seat of a chair had become lose either rescrewed or glued it back on. He compared this with a carpenter who could build a new desk leg, or a new front of a desk, to replace one that had broken. He testified that only the carpenter had installed doors and frames, inspected and adjusted fire doors and built cabinets. Mr. Reid testified that Mr. Matallo had been assigned to repair door closures on automatic doors and that both of the grievors had mounted and repaired door closures. Mr. McGee testified that the grievors repaired doors by tightening loose hinges and tightening or replacing a door closure. He indicated that the gfievors could repair an automatic door if there was a problem with a hinge, but a door company was called in for 21 anything other than a minor problem. THE CORE POINT RATING PLAN The job evaluation system indicates that although most positions can be classified using job evaluation guide charts, a small number of atypical positions not covered by the guide charts, as well as typical positions with duties that cannot be readily evaluated using the guide charts, can be evaluated using a core point rating plan. The core point rating plan involves assigning points to 12 different factors in accordance with a matching number of core point rating charts. The plan indicates that when performing this function reference should be had to illustrative classifications meant to exemplify the levels assigned for each factor, as well as to a summary of factor evaluations and total point ratings. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure uniformity when applying the various factor definitions. In the instant case the parties agreed on the rating levels for six of the twelve factors, namely: experience; motor skills; physical demand; sensory demand; strain from work pressures/demands/deadlines/; and work environment. The other six factors are discussed below. TRAINING/TECHNICAL SKILLS The definition of this factor states that it is to measure the minimum amount of independent study, formal education, internal and/or external training programs, 22 professional and technical courses, or apprenticeship programs, necessary to fill the requirements of a position. A note to raters states that a level 4 rating should be assigned when dealing with non-compulsory certified trades, such as a carpenter or painter, as well as non-regulated trades such as a welder or locksmith. The note states that level 5 should be assigned for a compulsory certified trade such as electrician, plumber, refrigeration and air conditioning mechanic. The college rated this factor for the gdevors' positions at level 2. The union submits that level 4 is more appropriate. The criteria for these levels, as well as for level 3, are as follows: 2. Required skills normally acquired through partial completion of secondary school education, or equivalent. Job duties require the ability to apply fundamental reading, writidg, and arithmetic skills. 3. Required skills normally acquired through attainment of secondary school graduation, or equivalent. Job duties require the ability to apply advanced reading, writing, and arithmetic skills. 4. Required skills normally acquired ttirough attainment of secondary school graduation and completion of additional job related training courses, or one year Community College diploma, or equivalent. Job duties require the ability to apply specialized skills. The position description form prepared by the college states that a grade 10 education or equivalent is required. From this we infer that the grievors likely had at least a grade 10 or equivalent education. The focus of the factor definitions, however, is not on actual formal educational levels but rather on the skills that are normally acquired through certain levels of education. 23 Mr. McGee testified that the college asked for a grade 10 education, together with four years experience, so that employees would know how to use hand tools and possess manual dexterity. Mr. Reid testified that there was no way a person with grade 10 could do the work of a general maintenance worker without hands on skills. He contended that general maintenance workers now require the basic knowledge and skills of an electrician, a mechanic, a carpenter, a plumber and a painter. He said that he would go so far as to say that they require more knowledge than a tradesperson since a tradesperson does his trade while a general maintenance worker does the duties of several trades. The representative of the union contended that the reference in the level 4 definition to the ability to apply specialized skills was designed to capture the work of skilled trades workers and that certain tasks performed by the grievors fell into this category. He submitted that the grievors should be given credit for using these skills on a regular and recurring basis. He further submitted that by taking advantage of the fact that the grievors had gas fitter licences the college had made possession of a licence a de facto job requirement. The representative of the union subsequently stated that more than a grade 10 education was required, although not the completion of a full apprenticeship. Counsel for the college argued that level 2 was all that was necessary. She contended that a gas fitter licence had not been a requirement for the job. While the grievors performed certain duties also performed by skilled tradespersons, we do not accept Mr. Reid's view that they required the basic knowledge and skills of all of the skilled trades workers employed by the college. The note to raters states that level 4 should be assigned to the non-compulsory certified trades as well as 24 non-regulated trades. This suggests that the reference to specialized skills in the level 4 definition is to the full range of skills associated with a trade. The evidence does not, however, suggest that the grievors' duties required the ability to apply the full skills and knowledge of a trade. Accordingly, a level 4 rating is clearly inappropriate. The reference in the definitions for level 2 and level 3 to reading, writing and arithmetic skills are not of much assistance as the grievors worked with their hands. The illustrative classifications, (clerk supply A, B, C; food service worker A, B; reproduction equipment operator A; and security guard for level 2; bus driver; clerk general B, C; data entry operator A, B; secretary A; switch board operator for level 3) are not particularly helpful in assessing whether the nature of the skills exercised by the gfievors were those normally acquired through partial completion of secondary school such as to qualify for level 2; or normally acquired through graduation from secondary school so as to qualify for level 3. There are, however, two matters which suggest that level 3 is the more appropriate rating. One is that the relevant guide chart suggests that level 3 is generally appropriate for a general maintenance worker. The other is the fact that the grievors received training in order to allow them to perform the full range of their duties. Even if continuing education courses relating to the gas fitter licences are not taken into account, it is apparent that the grievors received on the job training from college tradesmen in a number of functions, including working on flushometers, changing ballasts and changing fan belts. The factor definition references both internal as well as external training programs. Having regard to these considerations we fred level 3 to have been the appropriate rating for the factor of training/technical skills. 25 COMPLEXITY This factor measures the amount and nature of analysis, problem-solving and reasoning required to perform job related duties. The college rated the grievors' positions at level 3. The union argues for level 4. The defmitions for these two levels are as follows: 3. Job duties require the performance of various routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes ancot methods. 4. Job duties require the performance of varied, non-routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. A general maintenance worker is listed as one of the illustrative classifications for level 3. The guide chart for skilled trades worker indicates that typically this position justifies a level 4 rating. The representative of the union asked Mr. Reid to compare the complexity of the work assigned to the gfievors with that assigned to skilled trades workers. Mr. Reid replied that he treated both of them the same. He made the statement that there are very few simple solutions. Counsel for the college asked Mr. Read if three examples of complexity set out in the electhcians' position description form were applicable to general maintenance workers. Mr. Reid replied that the gfievors had not done the work in the first example. This involved resolving installation requirements with respect to a computer system that had been purchased by a division of the college, including checking equipment for load requirements, designing and installing circuits for the equipment, and recording the 26 installation in electrical schematics. The second example referred to troubleshooting a heat pump which was not heating or cooling. It indicated that after identifying the electrical/mechanical components within the heat pump housing, an electrician would follow the electricity as it travelled through the wires and components in order to locate the malfunctioning component or defective circuit wiring and then replace it. Mr. Read initially stated that the grievors had done most of this work. He also said that the ghevors would not do electrical testing and if there was no power to the unit he would send an electrician to troubleshoot. The third example was for an electrician to liaise with contractors and provide information related to renovation work or the installation of new equipment; as well as to cope with emergency situations where a contractor accidentally sliced through a conduit. Mr. Reid's only comment with respect to this example was that these situations rarely happened with electricians. Counsel for the college asked Mr. Reid to relate the complexity of the grievors' jobs with the following entry for complexity in the position description form for a plumber: irovides se _ryi.'ce to a wide variety of new and old plumbing, draining, eating, cooling, corrosionprotection and fire-fighting systems that require etailed up-to-elate knowledge of current practices and code requirements. Responds quickly and efficiently in emergencies and executes remedial measures to contain the problem and prevent damage to College buildings and equipment. This includes quick analysis and evaluation oir situations. Makes emergency repairs. 27 Mr. Reid replied that except for fire fighting systems, this excerpt related to the grievors' jobs. He added that one did not have to know much about code requirements to perform maintenance work at the Casa Loma campus. Mr. McGee testified that most of the tasks performed by the gfievors were routine in that they were repetitive. He gave as examples the installing of cork boards and ensuring they were level; tightening a hinge; re-securing the base of a chair; and removing a screw to take down a ballast. He said that if a light was not working in the board room where the heatings were held, and still did not work after the light bulb had been changed, a grievor would check the applicable panel. Mr. McGee stated that if the situation required more than this an electrician would be called to analyse the problem, determine the location of the trouble, and then fix it. The representative of the union contended that because the grievors worked across a variety of trades they faced a need to deal with a spectrum of problems which were non-routine to them. He submitted that the union was not directly comparing the grievors to skilled trades workers at this college, but rather to an average skilled trades worker as well as to the painter at this college. , Counsel for the college submitted that although the gdevors performed a diversity of tasks these were often repeated and involved implementing the same solutions over and over. She argued that if the grievors encountered an out of the ordinary problem they would refer it to a skilled trades worker, Mr. Reid or Mr. McGee. She contended that the grievors were not required to troubleshoot. In response to this last point the representative of the union correctly noted that troubleshooting had not characterized the duties of the painter who was at pay band 9. 28 The tasks performed by the grievors differed considerably from each other. Accordingly, they were required to use different and unrelated processes and methods. This type of situation is covered by the definitions for both level 3 and level 4. The difference between the definitions is that level 3 covers various complex tasks that are routine; whereas level 4 covers complex non-routine tasks. Much of a skilled trades worker's duties were presumably routine, although at times unusual situations would arise which required the exercise of the more advanced skills and knowledge associated with that individual's trade. For example, the evidence suggests that mechanics routinely cleaned supplementary heating coils and that this function was also performed by the gfievors. If a coil was blocked solid, however, a mechanic would remove the coil and replace it with a new one. Mechanics would also deal with any leaks in the coils. The grievors changed light bulbs and ballasts on a regular basis. They did not, however, deal with electrical problems relating to the electrical distribution system at the college or the supply of power to the heating, cooling or ventilation systems. Mr. Read's evidence indicated that the grievors did not perform the type of work associated with the three examples of complexity associated with an electrician's work set out in the electricians' position description form. Mr. Reid's evidence that most of the complexity portion of the plumber's position description form also related to the grievors was correct in the sense that the grievors provided a service to the various systems at the college and addressed emergency situations. On the other hand, it is not suggested that the grievors addressed the full range of plumbing issues. The plumber's position description form indicated that 90 percent of the plumber's work consisted of the following tasks, many of which clearly differed in nature from the work performed by the grievors. The incumbent is primarily involved in the operation, systematic maintenance, and the repatr and installation of the plumbing, drainage, fire safety, heating, cooling and water conditioning systems of the physical plant of the buildings to which they may be assigned. The incumbent is also involved in the provision, maintenance, testing and repairs to heating, cooling, ventilation, refrigeration and water conditaoning systems. Carrying out these duties may require providing technical information to other team members. The representative of the union compared the complexity of the gdevors' positions with that of the painter when employed by the college. The position description form for the painter, however, listed the tasks set out below under the heading of complexity. The evidence does not suggest that the grievors had input into painting schedules or that they were required to maintain knowledge of new materials and techniques. Prepares pta'chase recommendations and maintain appropriate stock of materials and equipment. Dealing with the client; adjusting to the diverse scheduling requirements. Providing input to the Can~pus Manager or designate on painting schedules. Maintain knowledge of new materials and techniques. Most of the grievors' duties appear to have been relatively routine in the sense that the grievors generally dealt with the same type of situations on an ongoing basis. Certain tasks, such as snaking drains, were added to the range of tasks they performed, but these too apparently became routine. If the grievors came across something out of the ordinary they were not expected to try to determine a solution to the problem. Rather the matter was referred to a skilled trades worker. Two non-routine situations where the grievors were clearly not assisting a skilled trades worker, and which might have occurred prior to the filing of the grievances, were referred to in evidence. One was the time that the grievors replaced a main drain which had lines to six urinals. Another was Mr. Matallo's assignment to repair a corroded main line when the plumber who had been assigned the work did not show up. A possible third situation was the installation of gas piping in the jewellery arts area, although there was no indication one way or the other as to whether a skilled trades worker was also involved with this work. No evidence was given as to when the work on the drain was performed. Mr. Reid stated that. he could not recall when the other two incidents had occurred. We do not view these situations, which presumably occurred over a period of several years, as sufficient justification for rating the grievors' positions on the basis that their job duties required the performance of varied non-routine tasks. Having regard to these considerations we £md that the college appropriately rated the grievors' positions at level 3 for complexity. JUDGEMENT The definition for this factor states that it measures the independem judgement and problem-solving required on a job. It assesses the difficulty in identifying various choices of action and in exercising judgement to select the most appropriate action. It also considers mental processes such as analysis, reasoning or evaluation. The college rated this factor at level 3, which the general maintenance worker guide chart indicates is the typical rating for this classification. The union contends that level 4 is more appropriate. The guide chart for skilled trades worker indicates that level 4 is the typical rating for that classification. The definitions for level 3 and level 4, together with the illustrative classifications for the two levels, are as follows: 3. Job duties require some moderate degree of judgement. Problem-solving involves the identification and breakdown of the facts and components of the problem situation. Clerk General C; Secretary A, B; Security Guard 4. Job duties require a considerable degree of judgement. Problem-solving involves handling a variety of conventional problems, questions or solutions. with established analytical techniques. ECE Worker; Nurse; Secretary C The representative of the union asked Mr. Reid to compare the judgement required of the grievors with that required of skilled trades workers. Mr. Reid replied that it was just the same. He stated that in his group of skilled personnel he did not look at a general maintenance worker as an unskilled person but rather as someone with more skills than others since he needed the skills of a number of trades. Counsel for the college pointed out to Mr. Reid that the plumber's position description form said that the plumber must be able to identify and resolve problems which may be integral to systems or equipment, including "back flow prevention which could cause contamination of drinking water". Counsel asked Mr. Reid if it had been the grievors' job to identify and resolve problems that could contaminate drinking water. Mr. Reid replied that the grievors could be called upon to replace a backflow preventer. Counsel then asked Mr. Reid if the grievors had the ability to analyze and solve problems that could lead to the contamination of drinking water. He replied "I'm sure, yes". Mr. 32 Reid's evidence did not suggest that the grievors had actually been called upon to analyze and solve this kind of problem. In response to a question from counsel for the college Mr. Reid stated that the grievors did not perform the duties listed under judgement in the electricians' position description form. These were analyzing the diverse electrical, lighting and equipment installations as they related to the different environmental and occupancy demands on the college, and also analyzing various situations to accommodate ongoing changes to building usage. Mr. McGee testified that the judgement required of the grievors was common sense, such that when replacing a ballast they took the old one down and replaced it with a new one. He submitted that not a lot of analysis was required. He stated that while an electrician would trace a lack of power back to its source,, once the grievors had determined that the switch and breaker were on they would raise the problem with an electrician. The representative of the union contended that although level 4 is the normal rating for skilled trades workers, the trades workers at this college are rated at level 6 for judgement. He described the phrase "handling a variety of conventional problems" as a good way of describing what the grievors did when they made florescent lights work, cleaned drains and built walls in Mr. McGee's office. He submitted that the work involved handling these problems and solving them, although the analysis might come quickly and appear straight forward to people with experience in this area. As noted above, the relevant guide chart indicates that a typical skilled trades worker will normally be rated at level 4 for this factor. The parties have apparently agreed to rate skilled trades workers in the employ of the college at a higher level, presumably because they are at times required to exercise a higher than normal degree of judgement. This does not, however, alter the fact that the job evaluation system contemplates that a level 4 rating will generally be appropriate for a fully qualified skilled trades worker. We do not accept Mr. Reid's evidence that the gdevors exercised the same degree or a greater degree of judgement than skilled trades workers at this college. Apart from the non-routine situations referred to earlier, when faced with something out of the usual they were not expected to resolve the problem but rather it was referred to a skilled trades worker for resolution. The evidence concerning the work performed by the grievors does not suggest that they utilized analytical techniques similar to those used by employees in the three illustrative classifications for a level 4 rating. The relevant guide chart lists the typical duties of an early childhood education worker as including the provision of feedback to parents as to children's progress; providing guidance to students involved in early childhood studies; and scheduling and developing activity programs. The guide chart for a nurse lists as typical duties the provision of nursing care for minor illnesses and injuries; interpreting the role of community agencies to students and personnel; and establishing and evaluating a college's health centre services in conjunction with a medical consultant and the appropriate college administrator. The typical duties of a secretary C include researching material to provide supervisors with background information required for policy and planning meetings, as well as assembling and organizing information and materials for presentation. There were some tasks referred to in the evidence which the grievors performed that might have required the application of analytical techniques. For example, Mr. Reid testified that 50 percent of the time it was general maintenance workers who serviced an automatic eye associated with an automatic air filter system so that it operated properly. We can speculate as to the type of problems that might have developed with the automatic eye and the analytical techniques required to ascertain the problem and correct it. Lacking any evidence on point, however, we do not know if the gdevors actually encountered any such problems when servicing the electric eye and, if they did, what analytical techniques they might have employed as opposed to possibly referring the matter to a mechanic. Similar considerations apply to the grievors' work on boilers. Mr. McGee testified that Mr. Matallo was involved with the installation of new boilers. It may have been that problems arose with the installation which required the use of analytical techniques to understand what was causing the problems and to address them. It would be highly speculative, however, to assume that Mr. Matallo, as opposed to someone else involved in the installation work, had performed this type of analysis. The same applies to Mr. Reid's evidence that the gdevors assisted a mechanic to do the pre-season servicing of boilers, work which involved dismantling and reinstalling the gas piping. It may be that problems developed which required the use of analytical techniques to resolve. There is nothing before us, however, to suggest that a grievor, rather than a mechanic, performed any such analysis. Having regard to the above, we fred that the union has not demonstrated that a 4 rating is appropriate for the factor of judgement. INDEPENDENT ACTION The definition of this factor indicates that it measures the independence of action and decisions required by a job. It states that imtiative, creativity and decisions are governed by various controls and that such controls can be in the form of supervision, policies, procedures or established practices. The college rated the grievors' positions at level 3. A general maintenance worker is one of the illustrative classifications for this level. The union argues for level 4, the typical level for a skilled trades worker. The definitions for levels 3 and 4 are as follows: 3. Job duties are performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices under periodic supervision, with occasional periods of Supervisor input or verification. There is moderate freedom to act independently. 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 Super~sor input or verification when requested. Mr. Reid testified that he assigned work to the grievors and they performed the work. He stated that they also did things over and above what was required, such as when they identified worn belts when changing filters and replaced the belts. Mr. Reid stated that for 90 percent of the time the gfievors were not under the direction or supervision of a tradesperson or lead hand, and they worked independently just as the trades did. 36 In response to questions from counsel for the college, Mr. Reid indicated that unless they were continuing some work that had previously been assigned to them the gfievors would go to his office in the morning and receive work orders. Written work orders would be returned to Mr. Reid marked with a "C" when the work was completed. Mr. Reid stated that if he gave the grievors a verbal order the next time he saw them he would ask if they had taken care of the matter. He said that he would check work done on the automatic ventilation system. In response to questions from counsel for the college, Mr. Reid stated that the grievors did not get involved in the type of independent action referred to in an entry on the electricians' position description form. This entry referred to ensuring the continual operation of electrical lighting distribution systems, environmental facilities and grounds equipment and also making recommendations for system and/or equipment upgrades. The representative of the union contended that whereas the mechanics, electricians and plumber at this college were rated at level 5 for independent action, the union felt level 4 was the appropriate fit for the grievors. He submitted that Mr. Reid left the grievors with considerable freedom since he trusted them. He argued that level 3 related to someone who was on a shorter leash. Counsel for the college argued that the grievors did not decide what work needed to be done. She submitted that the maintenance functions they performed without direct supervision did not require supervision, and if they assisted a skilled trades worker they were under the supervision of that employee. Although the grievors normally worked independently of direct supervision, because the work they performed was generally routine it was logically done in 37 accordance with established procedures and past practices. Mr. Reid either verbally or by returned work order received confirmation that every task assigned to the grievors was completed. The only evidence of the grievors performing work they had not been specifically assigned was the replacement of fan belts they identified as being worn while changing filters. Mr. Reid stated that this did not occur very often and he would be advised by the grievors when it did happen. It does not appear that the grievors 'adapted procedures or practices to meet particular situations or problems. Instead non-routine situations were assigned to skilled trades workers. Having regard to these considerations we affmn the level 3 rating assigned by the college. COMMUNICATIONS The factor definition indicates that this factor measures the requirement for effective communication for the purpose of providing advice, explanation, influencing others, and/or reaching agreement. It states that consideration is given to the nature and purpose of the communication and the confidentiality of information involved. The college rated this factor at level 1, the typical level for a general maintenance worker. The union argues for level 2. A skilled trades worker is one of the illustrative classifications for level 2. The definitions for these two levels are as follows: 38 1. Job duties require communication of a routine nature for the purpose of furnishing, exchanging, or discussing factual data or information. Personal courtesy and normal working/social relationships are required. 2. Job duties require communication for the p _u:rpose of providing detailed explanations, clarification, and interpretation of data or information. There may be need to empathize with and understand the needs of others in order to handle problems or complaints. Occasional involvement with confidennal information which has minor disclosure implications. Mr. Reid testified that the communication demands on the gdevors were the same as for skilled trades workers. He stated that if the grievors were assigned to a job requiring a material take off they would compile a list of the materials required and communicate with a supplier to ascertain their cost. He said that they would bring the information to him and he would give them a purchase order number following which a grievor would go to the supplier and pick up the material. Counsel for the college suggested to Mr. Reid that the grievors only talked to suppliers when ordering supplies that were getting low. Mr. Reid disagreed. He stated that the grievors would be assigned to a project such as Mr. McGee's new office where they did a material take off, priced the items required including drywall and metal studs, and then gave him the general cost which he passed on to Mr. McGee. College counsel asked Mr. Reid if there had been any other similar examples. Mr. Reid replied that this was the only one he could think of at the time. Mr. McGee testified that Mr. Reid asked the grievors to call suppliers to get prices for drywall, corkboards, screws, anchors, washers and different replacement parts, whereas a skilled trades worker would deal with more complex information such as amperage, voltage and RPM' s. According to Mr. McGee, skilled trades workers dealt with govermnent authorities, the electricians dealt with Ontario Hydro, and the mechanics dealt with an insurance company that on an annual basis checked the college's boilers. The representative of the union relied on Mr. Reid's evidence indicating that the grievors' communication responsibilities were similar to those of skilled trades workers. Counsel for the college contended that the grievors' communications were only for the purpose of furnishing or exchanging factual data. The grievors' communication responsibilities appear to have fit comfortably Within the definition of level 1. They received instructions from Mr. Reid and passed on information to him. Apart from the situation involving Mr. McGee's new office they obtained prices for relatively standard items. The grievors' communication responsibilities clearly did not meet the requirements for level 2. They did not provide detailed explanations or clarifications or communicate for the purpose of interpreting data or information. They also did not have any involvement with confidential reformation. Having regard to these considerations, we £md that level 1 was the appropriate rating. _ RESPONSIBILITY FOR DECISIONS/ACTIONS This factor measures the impact on internal and public relations, the responsibility for information management, equipment, assets and records, and the consequences of decisions and/or actions. The college rated the grievors' positions at level 3, the typical level for a general maintenance worker. The union contends that level 4, the typical level for a skilled trades worker, is more appropriate. The definitions of these two levels are as follows: 3. Decisions and/or actions have moderate impact on the organization. Errors are usually detected by verification and review and may result in disruption of the workflow, duplication of effort, and/or limited waste of resources. 4. Decisions and/or actions have considerable impact on the organization. Errors are detected after the fact and may result in considerable interruption and delay in work output and waste of resources. Mr. Reid testified that the grievors had the same responsibility for their decisions and actions as the skilled trades workers, namely to complete the work in a responsible way. He stated that as with the skilled trades workers, if a project was not completed, or not completed in a reasonable time, he would ask why. Mr. McGee indicated that if the grievors made an error they were responsible for remedying it. He stated that the results of any errors would be inconvenience caused by a shelf not being level or a drawer not operating properly. He compared this with an electrician blowing a transformer which could result in a lack of power for hours. In response to questions tSom the representative of the union, Mr. McGee agreed that a reference in the painter's position description form to possible wastage of materials and labour dollars was also true for the other trades. Mr. McGee also agreed that if the ghevors did not do a good job when repairing drywall, or left material behind, there would be a similar wastage of material and labour, and if they did not install fan belts properly the belts might wear out faster or break. The representative of the union submitted that skilled trades workers at this college were rated at level 4 for this factor. He contended that the impact of mistakes by the grievors when they performed skilled trade functions was the same as for mistakes made by the skilled trades. He argued that whether the grievors or skilled trades workers "messed up" the responsibility would first fall on Mr. Reid and then on Mr. McGee, and so there was less reason to fred any significant difference in the level of responsibility between the grievors and the skilled trades. Given the fact that the grievors generally worked without direct supervision, it seems reasonable to assume that errors they made would be detected after the fact. This type of situation is referred to in the defmition for a level 4 rating. Level 4, however, also provides that errors may result in considerable interruption and delay in work output and waste of resources. Nothing in the evidence suggested that an error on the part of a grievor might cause considerable interruption or a considerable waste of resources. This was also true of much of the work performed by skilled trades workers. Some of their work if done incorrectly, however, could potentially result in major problems for the college. The position description forms for the plumber, the mechanics and the electricians refer to a possible shut down of college facilities if the plumbing, environmental and electrical distribution systems are not properly maintained. Even the painter when employed by the college apparently did major painting jobs of the type now performed by contractors. Errors on a major job might potentially result in more than just a limited waste of resources. Having regard to the foregoing we affmn the 3 level rating given by the college. 42 CONCLUSION The college's rating of the grievors' positions resulted in a point total of 456, which was within the range of 451 - 510 points associated with pay band 7. Our finding that the ghevors should have been rated at level 3 for training/technical skills increases this by 20 points to 476. This is still within the range for pay band 7. The grievances are, accordingly, hereby dismissed. Dated this 2nd day of April, 1998 "Kevin Mailloux" College Nominee IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: GEORGE BROWN COLLEGE the Employer, -and- ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION the Union. AND IN THE MATTER OF THE GRI-EVANCE OF ALDO MATALLO #95B664 DISSENT I concur in the part of this award which found that Level 3 was the appropriate level under the Training/Technical Skills factor. However, I would have also found that, based on the evidence, 3 other factor ratings should have been increased, as follows: 1. Judgement Level 4 definition includes the ability to handle a variety of conventional problems. This is a particularly accurate description of the grievors' work - as they must continually solve (conventional) problems related to repairs of drains, flooring, toilets, walls, fluorescent lights, etc. Level 3 as argued by the College, only allows for a "moderate" degree of judgement in problem-solving, whereas, the phrase "considerable" is more accurate. Note that Level 5 uses the Word "significant", meaning more than considerable in this context; and Level 6 (the typical rating for Skilled Trades) uses "high degree". Thus, the rating for the grievors should be increased from 3 to 4 in this factor, giVing them an extra 18 points. ! 2. Independent Action It is clear fi.om Mr. Reid's testimony that the grievers act independently throughout most of their work day, with only occasional indirect supervision by a Tradesman, and very rarely with direct supervision from their Lead Hand. Level 3, as argued by the College, only provides for "moderate freedom to act independently", whereas Level 4 provides for "considerable fi.eedom to act independently". Again, as in the previous factor, the word "considerable" is the more accurate descriptor. Thus, the rating should increase from Level 3 to Level 4, adding 13 points to the grievers score. 3. Responsibility for Decision This factor must relate appropriately to the ratings (and descriptors) given to the grievers in both Judgement and Independent Action, for the evaluation as a whole to make sense. Thus, Level 4 is again the accurate and appropriate rating. The impact of mistakes made by the grievers is the same as the impact of mistakes made by Tradesmen where their duties overlap, because of the level of judgement and independence they have in their jobs. Level 4 is the typical rating level for Tradesmen, and again, the word "considerable" is used in describing the impact of errors. Thus, the rating should increase to Level 4 providing an additional 18 points to the grievers. Adding these increases to that agreed to by the majority in the award (20), the total number of points increases by (20 + 18 + 13 + 18) = 69. The grievers were granted 456 by the Committee. Add 69, and the new total is 525. That places the grievers in pay band 8 (511 - 570 pts.). Thus, I would have awarded an increase to Pay Band 8 effective as of the date of the grievance. Dated at TORONTO, Ontario this 31 day of March, 1998. Sandra Nicholson, Union Nominee