Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMcDonald 87-11-17 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION (hereinafter called the Union) - and- SENECA COLLEGE (hereinafter called the Employer) - and- CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCES OF G. McDONALD, M. McKIBBON, AND J. VISSER SOLE ARBITRATOR PROFESSOR IAN A. HUNTER APPEARANCES: FOR THE UNION: MR. EUGENE WILSON MR. CHARLIE SUMA MS. BETTY EGRI FOR THE COLLEGE: MS. ANGELA WILLIAMS A HEARING WAS HELD AT SENECA COLLEGE IN TORONTO, ONTARIO ON NOVEMBER 11, 1987. AWARD The three Grievors, Mabel McKibbon, GeorGia McDonald and Judy Visser are all currently classified as Food Service Workers, Atypical at Seneca ColleGe. They are Core Point rated at 179 points, Pay Band 2. Each Grievor performs the same job; the Grievors seek the same remedy; consequently all three Grievances were heard together. I wish to record my appreciation to the ColleGe and the Union representatives for the clear and cogent way in which evidence was presented. There are two job evaluation factors which are not in dispute: KnowledGe -- traininG and experience; B2 (41 points) WorkinG Conditions (visual); A5 (3 points). The differences between the parties on the other job evaluation factors are tabulated below: Factor College Ra~ing Union Ra~ing Job RatinG A2 B3 Guidance Received A2 B3 Communications A2 B3 KnowledGe -- skill 1 2 WorkinG Conditions: Manual Effort B5 C5 WorkinG Conditions: Environment A5 B5 2 The Food Service Workers, Atypical all work at the Eaton Hall Management Development Centre. Eaton Hall (the former country residence of Lady Eaton) is a conference centre, operated by Seneca College, and made available for business conferences or seminars. Eaton Hall will also cater to wedding receptions, banquets, etc. The Centre can accommodate 92 guests in 44 rooms. There are three dining areas: Room 209, the largest, Room 211, smaller, and the Zodiac Room (smallest). The evidence left me in no doubt that Eaton Hall is an outstanding facility with commodious accommodation, quality cuisine, and excellent service. The Food Service workers work on three shifts: 6:30 a.m.- 3:00 p.m.; 11:30 a.m.-8:00 p.m.; 2:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. Although they must be flexible to accommodate scheduling exigencies, these shifts do not rotate. The three grievors were on the early (i.e., 6:30 a.m.-3:00 p.m.) shift. I asked the grievors to take me through a "typical" day on the job and, from this evidence, I have concluded that the job has both "primary" and "secondary" functions. The grievors' primary duties, are preparation of the dining rooms for the service of meals and subsequently the service of meals. This means: setting up tables and chairs; folding napkins; arranging cutlery, etc. Serving the meals involves serving food to tables and removing dishes and food from tables. There is some minimal food preparation (principally at breakfast, 3 such as mixing orange juice, making coffee, toast, adding cream to creamers, putting cereal in dishes, etc.). There are also clean-up duties after the service of each meal: for example, cleaning tables, changing linen, occasional dishwashing, polishing silver, etc. Secondary tasks include (a) demonstrating to Hospitality- Flight Service students the proper methods of food presentation and service; (b) taking soiled table linen to housekeeping and picking up fresh linen; (c) attention to guests in such functions as seating late guests, ensuring that guest checks are signed, dealing with special food requests; presenting the group convenor with the meal check; answering telephone calls to the dining room, etc. While on duty the grievors wear a prescribed uniform. After the evening shift (concluding at 10:00 p.m.) the tasks include turning the lights out and "locking up" the silver cupboard. The current classification acknowledges that the grievors are atypical Food Service workers. This is because Eaton Hall is a unique facility and, as Ms. Williams accurately put it, the job does not easily fall into the "benchmark" descriptions. (1) Job Difficulty This factor is designed to measure complexity of work and 4 judgment required in solving problems. Raters are instructed to evaluate complexity first, then judgment. (a) Complexity The current classification conceives the work as involving "specific routine tasks," straightforward and repetitive in nature. The Union submits that the job involves "performance of specific tasks that involve related steps, processes or methods. From the evidence, I have concluded that the tasks are routine, straightforward, and repetitive in nature. (b) Judgment The current classification is "some judgment or choice of action within limits. Some analysis is required in problem- solving." The Union submits that the proper classification is: "moderate degree of judgment. Problem-solving requires the identification and breakdown of facts and components of the problem situation." 5 I asked the grievors what was the most complex problem they encountered? They all agreed that it was when the Functions Summary Sheet (prepared weekly by the sales and catering office) indicates a certain number of guests attending a meal, but others turn up unexpectedly; or when groups want to sit together and the seating plan must be rearranged. Such rearrangement is carried out pursuant to an Eaton Hall policy that (a) guests will not be turned away; and (b) seating will be rearranged, if necessary, to suit the convenience and desire of guests. I am satisifed that the grievors are correctly classified at A2. Some judgment (re seating) is required; some limited choice of action is exercised. However, the discretion is exercised within management policies and the judgment is mechanical in nature (i.e., how to rearrange the tables). There was no evidence of "problem solving" or "breakdown of facts and components of the problem situation." Moreover, I accept the evidence of Mr. David Prime-Coote, the Director of Eaton Hall, that the responsibility for altering the Function Summary Sheet or rearranging seating to accommodate guests is primarily that of the maitre d' (or, in her absence, the assistant maitre d') and not the function of the Food Service Worker. Because all three grievors are competent and highly experienced, I do not doubt that they do, on occasion, alter the Function Summary Sheet and make table rearrangements to suit 6 guests' requests; however, it is the job and not the grievors that I am required to evaluate. For these reasons, I am convinced that the current classification (A2) is correct. (2) Guidance Received The current classifiction is: "Work performed in accordance with specific and detailed instructions. Questions on deviations from specific instructions are referred to supervisor. Work assignments are regularly reviewed on completion by supervisor for completeness and accuracy. The Union's proposed rataing is: "Work is performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices. Unfamiliar situations are reviewed with supervisor. Work assignments are intermittently and/or periodically checked for quality." The evidence was that the grievors' work is performed in accordance with established procedures at Eaton Hall. Past practice is used to resolve any unanticipated situations. None of the grievors could recall a single occasion when there was a matter not covered by past practise and which required them to refer it to their supervisor (the maitre d'). Indeed, for parts 7 of the grievors' shifts, neither the maitre d' nor the assistant maitre d' is present. There is no regular review by the Supervisor, Iris Kelly, of work assignments (although there is a regular review by the Director of Eaton Hall, Mr. Prime-Coote, who inspects the dining rooms regularly at 11:45 a.m. each day when he is at the Centre). But the check by the supervisor is, at best, intermittent. The grievors testified that their contact with the supervisor for review of work performance was "very occasional." The grievors are not given specific, detailed instructions. The grievors' work is performed in accordance with practices established at Eaton Hall. Only rarely would they refer any matter to their supervisor. Quality checks by the supervisor are intermittent to occasional. From the evidence, I am satisfied that the B3 is the "best fit." (3) Communications Raters are intructed to consider only contacts that occupy a "significant portion of time" are a "regular and integral" part of the 3ob. The grievors have two such contacts, both occurring on a daily basis: (a) with guests -- who are primarily middle 8 management business persons using the Centre; and (b) with hospitality-flight service students who work with the grievor on each meal service. The current classification is A2: "Work involves contact of a routine nature for the purpose of furnishing, obtaining or discussing factual data or information, arranging appointments, etc. Contacts are primarily with employees at comparable or lower levels within the College or with individuals below middle management levels outside the College." The Union's proposed classification is at B3: "Work involves contacts for the purpose of providing detailed explanation to ensure understanding on matters such as how information was collected or how a figure was calculated. Contacts are primarily with employees of higher levels within the College and with individuals at middle management levels outside the College." I am satisfied that the A classification is correct for purpose of contacts. I am not satisfied that 2 is the correct level of contacts. Consequently this rating should be amended from A2 to A3 and I so direct this change. I do so because the grievors' regular and integral contacts, occupying a significant proportion of their working hours, are with guests staying at 9 Eaton Hall and these are (as Mr. Prime-Coote testified) primarily middle-management business executives. (4) Knowledge-Skill The current classification is that the work requires the ability to read, write and use simple arithmetic. The Union's proposed classification is "Ability to apply fundamental clerical or technical skills. May need to use fractions, decimals or commercial arithmetic. May gather and arrange a variety of standard data. May be required to operate standard laboratory or office equipment." The grievors present a meal check to the group convenor after each meal. But the check does not require cash payment; rather, it simply records the meal, the number of people in the group attending for that meal, and any extras (e.g., glasses of milk) ordered which are not included in the set meal price. There is no handling of cash. There is no till or cash register. There was no evidence that even simple arithmetic calculatioins were required, still less "fractions, decimals or commercial arithmetic." Nor is there any gathering or arranging of data. On the evidence, I am satisfied that the grievors are correctly classified at 1. 10 (§) Working Conditions -- Manual Effort The current classification reflects "light" manual effort, (i.e., lifting). The Union proposes "moderate" manual effort and physical exertion. The evidence established that moving tables and chairs from room to room is a regular (though not daily) part of the job. In addition the grievors daily lift trays of dirty dishes (averaging about 35 pounds) and stacks of dishes (estimated at 40 pounds). The College's response to this was neither to challenge the weights involved nor the frequency of the lifting required, but rather to point out that nothing in the 3ob description requires the grievor to carry, say, twenty plates; the grievors could carry less and make more trips. The succinct answer to this, as given by the grievor Judy Visser, was: If you ran back and forth with only five plates, it would take you all day." On the evidence, I am satisfied that moderate lifting and carrying (including up and down stairs) is an inherent, essential part of the job. Consequently, the rating should be C5. (6) Working Conditions -- Environment The current classification is "generally agreeable working 11 conditions such as those found inside offices or equivalent work 8reas." From the evidence I am satisfied that the working environment is in fact superior to most offices or equivalent work areas, and I direct that there be no change to the present A5 classification. To summarize my findings in graDh form: Job Evaluation Factor Degree Points Job Difficulty A2 50 Guidance Received B3 79 Communications A3 35 Knowledge -- training and experience B2 41 Knowledge -- skill 1 7 Working Conditions -- manual effort C5 21 Working Conditions -- visual A5 3 Working Conditions -- environment A5 3 By core point rating this produces a total of 239 points, Pay Band 3. 12 Accordingly the grievances of Visser, McDonald and McKibbon are allowed. DATED at the City of London this /~ day of November 1987. ~an A. Hunter Le Arbitrator COLLEGE Seneca GRIEVOR Visser; McDonald; McKibbon CLASSIFICATION/ POSITION Food Service Worker; Atypical HEARING DATE November 11, 1987 APPEARANCES: See Award MANAGEMENT UNION DECISION: Degree Points Job Difficulty A2 50 Guidance Received B3 79 Communications A3 35 Training S. Exper. B2 41 Knowledge Skill 1 7 Manual E flor t C 5 21 Working Conditions Visual A5 3 Environ. A5 3 Total Points 239 Pay Band Number 3 COMMENTS: //~ ARB I TRATOR ' S ~z~ DAT~. /~ ~ / 7 SIGNA~ ~