HomeMy WebLinkAboutStanley, Wisem 88-08-02BETWEEN:
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
(hereinafter called the Union)
- and -
SENECA COLLEGE
(hereinafter called the Employer)
- and -
CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCES OF DAVID STANLEY AND DOUG WISEMAN
SOLE ARBITRATOR
Professor Ian A. Hunter
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE UNION: Mr. Harry Karelas, Union Representative
Mr. Eugene Wilson, Chief Steward
Mr. Charlie Suma, Vice-President
Classification
FOR THE COLLEGE: Ms. Angela Williams, Personnel Mr. John Coulter, Supervisor
Mr. Mel Fogel, Director of Employee
Relations
AN ARBITRATION HEARING WAS HELD AT SENECA COLLEGE IN
TORONTO, ONTARIO ON FEBRUARY 1, 1988.
AWARD
The Grievors, Doug Wiseman and David Stanley are ~
Maintenance Handymen at Seneca College. Their positions are
currently rated at 467 points, pay band 7. There is one issue
with respect to the Position Description Form. The Union
proposes the addition (under Supplemental Data) "courses taken
by incumbents to further his knowledge in this position are:
(1) landskeeping, garden
(2) small engine repairs".
Both Grievors have taken (or are currently taking) such
courses. However, it is a position, not an incumbent, that I
am required to classify. The evidence did not establish that
Successful completion of courses would be a prerequisite to
employment as a Maintenance Handyman. Consequently, I direct
no change to the current Position Description Form.
The arbitration data sheet reveal that there are three
factors in dispute.
Rating College Evaluation Union Evaluation
Job Difficulty C3 D3
Knowledge: Training
and Experience C3 D3
Working Conditions - A5 C5
Visual Strain
From the evidence of Mr. David Stanley, the Maintenance
Handyman position involves two primary kinds of duties:
(1) groundskeeping; and (2) engine repair and maintenance.
(1) Groundskeeping
The evidence established that the incumbent looks after
all lawns, gardens, trees and shrubs at the College. This
involves grass cutting, pruning trees and shrubs, and spraying
herbicides and insecticides. The Maintenance Handymen
maintains filtration systems in the pool. They maintain the
parking lots. In the winter they are responsible for all
snowplowing on the College property.
(2) Engine Repair and Maintenance
The Grievors maintain a fleet of equipment (including
dump trucks, tractors, front end loaders, and smaller
machinery such as lawn mowers, hedgers, weed eaters, etc.).
This involves regular servicing as well as repair of
malfunctions. Unless the machinery is covered by a warranty,
"if something goes wrong with it, we'll repair it". If the
equipment at one of the satellite campuses malfunctions, a
Maintenance Handyman may be dispatched there to effect the
necessary repairs; alternatively, if the problem is major, the
equipment may be brought back by truck and repaired at the
Newnham Campus. In addition to routine maintenance and
tune-ups, the Grievors' repair work on College equipment
requires body work, carpentry, welding, and engine repair
"trouble shooting".
Allowing for seasonal variations, Mr. Stanley described
the second function (i.e. engine repair and maintenance) as
occupying more time than the first function (i.e.
groundskeeping) but this evidence was vigorously and
conclusively refuted by Mr. John Coulter, the Director of
Physical Resources. For the years 1985 and 1986, Mr. Coulter
had a study conducted of both the log books (which record, or
should record, the projects on which the Maintenance Handymen
are engaged) and, as a crosscheck, the expenditure accounts on
supplies and materials. This evidence, which I prefer to Mr.
Stanley's testimony, cast doubt upon much of Mr. Stanley's
evidence and, in particular, on his assertion that the engine
repair and maintenance function was the primary aspect of the
job. Without commenting further upon the general evidence
relating to the position, I record that I am satisfied from
the evidence that all aspects of the work testified to by Mr.
Stanley, in whatever proportion they actually occur, fall
properly within these words in the "Job Family" definition:
"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".
Turning now to the three specific job factors in dispute,
I summarize my conclusions as follows:
(1) Job Difficulty
The College rates these positions at C3. The Union
submits that the proper rating is D3. In considering
Complexity, the issue between the parties is whether the
complex tasks which the Grievors are required to perform are
(a) "varied" and (b) "normally" require different and
unrelated processes and methods.
The evidence established that some of the Grievors'
repair work is complex, but it is repetitive and routine in
nature. That is, repair of a clutch may be a "complex"
operation, but it is repaired by following the same essential
routine time after time. Any unanticipated problems are
usually answered by a Manual. Mr. Stanley testified: "Very
rare will I have a problem fixing anything. It's all
straightforward as far as I'm concerned". From the evidence,
only rarely would "different and unrelated processes and
methods" be required in problem solving. I accept Mr.
Coulter's characterization of the maintenance function as
"routine, semi-skilled minor maintenance work on internal
combustion engines".
Nor does the Groundskeeping element of the job warrant
any change in the job difficulty from C3 to D3. Here the
range of tasks (cutting grass, pruning, spraying) may be
diverse but they are neither complex nor normally require
different and unrelated processes to solve.
I hold that the Grievors are properly classified at C3.
(2) Knowledge-Training and Experience
The College has classified the position C3. Required
~kills are normally obtained by secondary school graduation or
equivalent and up to three years practical experience.
The Union seeks reclassification at D3: secondary school
graduation plus five years practical experience.
This factor gave me some difficulty. Obviously the
Grievors perform a diverse variety of handyman jobs. As Mr.
Stanley testified: "In our jobs we have to know a little bit
of everything". The issue is, how long after secondary
school would it take to acquire the practical experience
necessary to satisfy the minimum entrance requirement? I have
read, and adopt, the Notes to Raters which tell me not to
regard the actual training and experience which the incumbents
have (and in both cases they had less than three years
practical experience after secondary school and prior to
hiring) nor the desirable qualifications (and obviously the
more practical experience the better).
After weighing all of the evidence, I am not satisfied,
on a balance of probabilities, that the present classification
is incorrect. Consequently, I direct no change from C3.
(3) Working Conditions: Visual Strain
The Grievors are currently classified A5 - normal visual
concentration required more than 60% of the time.
The Union submits that the proper classification is C5:
"Considerable visual conCentration required. Required to
focus on Small areas and objects for up to two hours at a
time".
The only evidence proffered in favour of the Union's
submission was (a) eye strain during extended nighttime
snowplowing, (b) "squinting" in the sun while cutting grass,
and (c) wearing eye protectors while spraying insecticide or
welding.
I note first that none of these tasks, singly or
cumulatively, amount to anything like sixty percent of the
Grievors' working time. The nighttime snowplowing, while it
does require considerable visual concentration, occurs a
handful of times a winter. Mr. Coulter described it as "a
minor decimal point in the overall time spent on the job".
The "squinting" during grass cutting I consider to be "normal"
visual concentration on a sunny day. And the wearing of eye
protectors, while cumbersome, does not alter the concentration
required.
Consequently, I direct no change from the present A5
classification.
I append a rating sheet for this position.
The Grievances of Messrs. Stanley and Wiseman are hereby
dismissed.
DATED at the City of London this ~day of ~~ , 1988.
essor Ian A. Hunter
Arbitrator