HomeMy WebLinkAboutHopley 91-10-15 OPSEU ~ 91B400
IN THE MATTER OF AN EXPEDITED ARBITRATION
BETWEEN :
OPSEU
(hereinafter called the
"Union")
- and -
SHERIDAN COLLEGE
(hereinafter called the
"College")
AND IN THE MATTER~DF----~T~E GRIEVANCE OF
Corinne~)
AND IN THE MATTER OF A COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN ONTARIO COUNCIL OF REGENTS FOR COLLEGES OF APPLIED
ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY AND ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES'
UNION (FOR SUPPORT STAFF EMPLOYEES)
Board of Arbitration:
B. A. Kirkwood, Sole Arbitrator
Appearances for the Grievor:
Jay Jackson
Bill Mathison
Corinne Hopley
Appearances for the College:
Rosalee Spargo
Trudie Tumber
A hearing was held on September 24, 1991 in Oakville.
Page 2
AWARD
The incumbent has been an employee with the College
since August 18, 1986. She transferred to her current
position with the Department of Counselling and Special needs
on September 5, 1989. Her position was initially classified
as Clerk General Atypical, Payband 6. A new position
description was submitted by the incumbent's supervisor to
the Human Resources department in October, 1990. The College
reviewed the position and reclassified the position to Clerk
General D, Payband 7.
The Union agreed that the Position Description Form
(PDF) accurately described the grievor's position except for
the level of supervision described under the heading of
"Guidance Received." In any event, the Union claimed that
the incumbent's position ought to be reclassified as a
Support Services Officer A (Payband 8) with retroactive pay,
benefits, and interest from October 22, 1990. The Union
filed a grievance in support of its claim on January 18,
1991.
The points conferred by both parties to the
elements of the position in the Arbitration Data Sheet were
as follows:
Elements Management Union
Rating Points Rating Points
Job Difficulty C4 144 C4 144
Guidance Received D3 129 D4 150
Communications C3 84 C3 84
Knowledge/Training/ D4 90 D5 104
Experience
Knowledge/Skill 3 34 3 34
Page 3
Working Conditions/ A5 3 A5 3
Manual
Working Conditions/ B3 7 B3 7
Visual
Environmental A5 3 B5 13
Total Points 494 539
Payband Number 07 08
The elements of the job and the respective core
point rating in issue, were Guidance Received,
Knowledge/Training and Working Conditions/ Environmental.
These elements were rated by the parties as follows:
Elements Management Union
Rating Points Rating Points
Guidance Received D3 129 D4 150
Knowledge/Training D4 90 D5 105
Working Conditions
Environmental A5 3 B5 13
The purpose of the incumbent's position as set
forth in the PDF and as corroborated by the evidence was to
provide general administrative support services to the
Counselling and Special Needs department at the Brampton
campus. As an office manager, the incumbent was responsible
for all the office's administrative tasks. She was involved
in the management of the Career Centre, the career assessment
and testing service of students and in various projects run
by the department, especially the A.I.M.S. project.
GUIDANCE RECEIVED
The parties agreed thatthe Guidelines Available was
properly described by Level D as:
Page 4
Work is performed in accordance with procedures and
past practices which may be adapted and modified to
meet particular situations and/or problems.
Supervisor is available to assist in resolving
problems.
The ?DF described the degree and method of
supervision as "Work assignments are reviewed periodically,
usually by discussion." The Union disagreed with this
description and with its application to the Guidance Matrix,
Nature of Review Category.
The Union's representative submitted that the
incumbent worked with minimum general supervision of the
position and little direct supervision of the work. The
Union's representative argued that the incumbent's
responsibility was to ensure that a number of projects
functioned properly and she had to make independent decisions
on a variety of issues relating to the projects. These
decisions were not checked intermittently or periodically by
the supervisor. Accordingly the Union's representative
submitted that the Nature of Review was best described by
Level 4, which states:
Work assignments are subject to a general form of
review of achievement of specific objectives and
adherence to established deadlines.
The College's representative argued that the fogus
in Level 4 was related to the achievement of specific
projects. The College's representative submitted that the
incumbent was not responsible for the projects. The Co-
ordinator was. The incumbent was responsible, as part of the
support staff to carry out the tasks that were required to
achieve the projects.
The College's representative submitted that the
work that the incumbent received from the counsellors and the
Co-ordinator was reviewed periodically and' intermittently by
Page 5
the Director in addition to the review by the Co-ordinator.
The College submitted that Level 3 properly described the
level of review. Level 3 states:
Work assignments are intermittently and/or
periodically checked for quality.
The College's representative submitted that level 3
ought to be considered in the context of the other
categories. It was the first level where there was no
supervision by the "supervisor" and the review of the work
was dependent upon the individual "self-checking."
In determining the level of supervision involved in
the Nature of Review, it is necessary to consider the tasks
that the incumbent performed and the involvement of others in
reviewing the work performed.
The incumbent received directions from the
Director, Trudie Tumber and from the Co-ordinator Linda de
Jong. Both the Director's and the Co-ordinator's offices
were located on the Oakville Campus. The incumbent also
worked with counsellors who were located in the department's
office.
The department was responsible for running projects
throughout the year. At the beginning of the school year, it
had a booth at registration and it organized a project called
"Right Foot Day." As the year progressed, it held various
workshops, such as Time Management and the Wellness Fair.
The role that the incumbent had in Right Foot Day
was representative of her role in the other projects. The
Director had instituted Right Foot Day to assist new students
in their orientation to the College. A counsellor was
responsible for the project. However, as he was not at the
College during the summer he met with the incumbent and
Page 6
developed a list of tasks with the incumbent to ready the
project for the beginning of the school term. The tasks that
needed to be done included modifying the computer's data base
on the students, inputting new data, assembling information
and co-ordinating all the details that were required for the
project.
The incumbent had a background in computers and
could modify the data base, and she handled all the details
to ensure the success of the project. Similarly, as with
other projects, the incumbent organized the items that needed
to be done to ensure that the projects were carried out, such
as booking rooms and co-ordinating the staff's working
schedules to ensure that they were available for the
projects.
Similarly, the incumbent assisted the counsellors
by obtaining two guest speakers for workshops for the
counsellors and support staff. The incumbent obtained
authorization from the Director to proceed, arranged the
facility and arranged for the staff to attend. In these
cases, the incumbent bought a gift for the speaker and
thanked the speakers after their presentations.
The incumbent was involved in testing students.
She administered and invigilated the tests and correlated the
results. The incumbent administered tests to groups outside
the campus after obtaining authorization from the Director.
The incumbent used a Policy Book for Testing
Procedures to assist her in administering the tests. The
manuals did not give the procedures for each test, but gave
general instructions and provided the information that could
be given to those being tested. The incumbent clarified
questions from the students about the tests without providing
answers to the questions asked on the tests. As an
Page 7
invigilator, the incumbent identified any unusual behaviour,
such as fatigue or illness, which required the tests to be
rescheduled and she watched for cheating.
The incumbent's role with the A.I.M.S. project was
slightly different from her involvement with the other
projects. She was a member of a committee on A.I.M.S. The
Co-ordinator sat on the meetings, but did not give
instructions. Each person knew what had to be done and were
responsible for different functions. The incumbent took
minutes of meetings that were subsequently approved. The
incumbent developed a guidebook for the A.I.M.S. project.
She set up the data base for A.I.M.S. '91 and for the
registration system and put the instructions on the computer
to enable anyone to use the application by following the
instructions.
The incumbent had been involved in the hiring
procedure and the delegation of work to a part-time employee.
When the grievance was filed, the use of a part-time employee
was in its developmental stage. The Director stated that
initially a part-time employee was hired to help the
incumbent, while the incumbent became familiar with her job.
However, the Director concluded that a permanent part-time
employee was required. The incumbent .found, interviewed, and
recommended the present part-time employee to the Co-
ordinator and to the Director, who subsequently hired her.
The incumbent determined how the part-time employee was to be
used. The Director did not dispute that the incumbent
assigned work to the part-time employee, but felt there was
little flexibility in using the part-time employee as the
Director had only scheduled the part-time employee to work
ten hours a week.
The evidence showed that the incumbent worked for
the most part on her own co-ordinating and doing necessary
Page 8
administrative and clerical duties that needed to be done to
ensure each project's success. There was little direct
supervision of her work.
The Director and the Co-ordinator reviewed the
incumbent's work periodically. In a period of three months,
the Director met the incumbent seven times for this purpose.
There was little telephone communication between the Director
and the incumbent. The incumbent performed her functions
with minimum supervision by the director and the Co-
ordinator. The incumbent had great independence to do the
work that she was assigned.
The meetings with the Director lasted about one
half hour. There was no formalized structure nor agenda to
the meetings. The incumbent stated that she updated the
Director on the various ongoing activities and projects. She
obtained statistical data for the Director when requested.
She advised the Director on staff interaction and problems.
She advised the Director on the status of the student
testing. In the event that groups outside the College needed
testing, the incumbent obtained authorization from the
Director to administer the tests. The incumbent obtained
authorization from the Director to buy supplies.
A fundamental difference between the positions of
the Director and the incumbent lay in their perception of
their roles. The incumbent perceived that she reported to
the Director on the activities of the department. The
Director perceived that the Co-ordinator reported to her and
the incumbent performed clerical duties to assist the
professional staff.
The Director did not consider the incumbent
responsible for the decisions that had to be made for the
projects. The Director placed this responsibility on the Co-
Page 9
ordinator and the Counsellors. She saw the incumbent's
responsibilities as task oriented, to provide clerical work
such as booking rooms, overheads, scheduling events and staff
activities in order that the staff could attend, to expedite
time sheets, to make purchase orders and to respond to
routine matters.
The incumbent met the Co-ordinator for about one
half hour each week. The Co-ordinator was more involved with
the details of the incumbent's work than the Director. The
incumbent reported on the activities of the department and
the status of the projects. She' advised the Co-ordinator on
the degree of the testing required, the costs of testing
packages. She investigated computer software, hardware and
training and reported her findings to the Co-ordinator.
The incumbent's work was reviewed periodically.
However, the issue is whether the nature of the review meets
the criteria of the higher level 4. Level 4 focusses on the
purpose of the review. It requires that the work meet
specific objectives and deadlines.
The work which the incumbent performed required
specific tasks to be done, and those tasks had to be
accomplished by specific deadlines. Although the work was
task oriented and was both clerical and administrative in
nature, the work was directed to accomplish specific goals,
whether it was to carry out a project, to administer and
correlate testing results, or to provide information to the
Co-ordinator or Director.
Level 4 does not require the incumbent to be
responsible for the conceptualization and development of the
programs or projects. The incumbent was responsible that the
broad objective, that the projects be carried out efficiently
and properly be in accordance with the aims of the
Page 1.0
counsellors, the Co-ordinator and the Director. The work
that the incumbent performed was done independently and
accorded with the decentralization of the department that the
Director had enCouraged and developed.
Therefore I find that the Nature of Review for this
position goes beyond level 3 and meets that the more
independent standard of level 4. I find that by application
of the core point rating to D4 on the Guidance Received
Matrix that 150 points are to be allotted to this category.
KNOWLEDGE/ TRAINING
The Union submitted that as the ?DF indicated that
the incumbent must be either a college or high school
graduate, with job related courses as an asset, the minimum
level of education that the job required was a Community
College diploma. The Union's representative submitted that
it is the minimum level of education and not the desirable
level that must be reviewed. Therefore the Union ' s
representative argued that Level 5 was applicable. This
Level states:
Required skills normally acquired through
attainment of a two year Community College diploma
or equivalent.
The College's representative submitted that
education and experience were linked. A basic secondary
education was the minimum, if the incumbent had four to five
years working experience. The College would have liked the
incumbent to have courses in testing and Career Resource
Services, but it accepted that there were none available in
those areas. Therefore, to the College, experience was
important. The College submitted that secondary education
provided the necessary basic education, which could be
Page 11
supplemented by job related courses, such as micro or main
frame computer courses. The College's representative
submitted that Level 4 was applicable as follows:
Required skills normally acquired through
attainment of secondary school graduation and
completion of additional job related training
courses or equivalent.
A difficult aspect in assessing the knowledge and
training required for a position is segregating the skills
and abilities that an incumbent may have from the minimum
skills that are required for the job. The function that I
have is to determine what are the minimum skills for the job
and not what is desirable for the incumbent to have.
The incumbent stated that the psychology courses
were required to sensitize the individual to the students'
concerns and courses in office administration assisted'the
individual in management of the office. The incumbent stated
that the management aspects of the job required a person to
have more than a secondary education. Furthermore, courses
were required to maximize the use of computers.
It was acknowledged by the College that a secondary
education was not sufficient. It was recognized that a
psychology course was important. Psychology courses are not
found in the secondary school system and do not fall within
the scope of job related courses.
There were various data bases in existence for the
projects. Although the incumbent did not have to create data
bases, she had to have knowledge to modify data bases to meet
the needs of the department. The tasks that she had to
perform were greater than inputting information into an
existing system. The incumbent had to understand the system
to create a procedural manual. Therefore, certain job
Page 12
related courses, such as word processing or data base courses
were essential no matter what level of education the
incumbent had.
I find that as a result of the decentralization of
the department and the reliance by the Director on the Co-
ordinator and the counsellors to ensure the smooth
functioning of the department, that many responsibilities
were delegated to the incumbent. In order for the incumbent
to perform the tasks that she was .required to do, a secondary
education supplemented by job related courses, even in data
bases and word processing, would not be sufficient to carry
out the functions that the incumbent had to do. Without
doubt, experience provides an understanding of the operation
of an office, however, courses in Office Administration, such
as the eight month course that the incumbent'had, provides
the additional depth that is needed to manage an office with
little supervision.
When I look at all the courses that an individual
must have to perform this job, the incumbent must have a
minimum of a College diploma. It would be a rare person who
could perform this job with a high school diploma and job
related courses. The purpose of determining a minimum level
of skill and training that an incumbent must have, is to
recognize a minimum base level of skill required for the job
and not to recognize the skills of an exceptional person.
Therefore I find that D5 on the Knowledge/Training
Matix is to be applied and that the core point rating is to
be 104 points.
Page 13
WORKING CONDITIONS
The College submitted that Category A was
applicable, as the conditions that the incumbent was exposed
to were typical of those found in an office environment.
Therefore, the College submitted that Category A was
applicable, as follows:
Generally agreeable working conditions such as
those found inside offices or equivalent work
areas.
The Union submitted that as the College admitted in
its PDF that the position was subjected to poor air quality
100% of the time and noise from shared accommodations with
another department 100% of the time, these conditions reflect
slightly noisy, hot or cold conditions and Category B was
applicable. This Category states:
Slightly disagreeable working conditions. Exposure
to somewhat noisy, hot or cold conditions.
The incumbent worked in an office that was shared
by Counselling and Special Needs, Co-op and Employment
Resources, and Career Resources. The interior of the floor
was divided by partitions and baffles. The outside area of
the floor was divided into various offices. The incumbent
worked at one of the interior desks, surrounded by baffles.
The grievor's office backed onto the counselling offices.
The incumbent claimed that her work was frequently
disrupted by arguments resounding from the counsellor's
office. She stated that at times she was unable to talk on
the telephone. Arguments would occur when the student did
not get the placement that the student wanted or when the
placement was not satisfied with the quality of the work
Page 14
performed. The incumbent stated that she was also distracted
by the traffic around her office and the constant talking
between the students and the staff.
In analyzing the working conditions of the job for
the purposes of classification, I must look to the inherent
environmental aspects of the job. There are situations where
the nature of a job creates hazards to the individual's
health and safety. For instance, it is inherent to a miner
of asbestos that the miner is exposed to the risks of the
asbestos fibres in the air. The condition or risk is
inherent to the nature of the job.
The poor air quality in this case is not a
condition of work that is inherent to the position, but is an
Occupational Health and Safety problem that was dealt with.
The College admitted that it had had a problem with the poor
air quality. There were difficulties with rust in the
ventilation system, poor air circulation and fumes arising
from construction that was being done in the area at the time
that the grievance was filed. The College handled the noise
problem from the construction by moving the employees
affected or by sending them home. Therefore although the
incumbent worked in an area that was affected for a time by
poor air, it was not a reflection of the task, duties, or
responsibilities that she had to handle.
The noise that affected the incumbent's work was
that of conversations between the various office employees,
and the students and their counsellors. Voices between staff
and students are sounds that are inherent to an office
environment. While there may be occasions where the students
would be volatile, angry and would raise their voices when
they were speaking to their counsellors, the incumbent
admitted that these occasions were not frequent. There was
Page 15
no evidence that the noises were greater than any other
office.
Therefore I find that the more accurate description
is described by Category A. By application of the corepoint
rating this element of the position receives 7 points.
JOB FAMILY
The Union submitted that the job family ought to be
changed to Support Services as the work was project oriented
and not clerical in nature. He submitted that the job was to
run ongoing projects, workshops, and to balance
administrative details, advertising and follow-up details.
I do not find that the job family ought to be
changed as this job involves both clerical and administrative
functions. A fundamental element that is found throughout
the Support Services Officer Series is the conceptualization
of projects. At the level A, the Support Services Officer's
typical duties are to develop and recommend policies and
procedures for the administration of the unit. This
fundamental element is missing from the incumbent's position.
However, as the administrative tasks involved in the
incumbent's job are greater than the clerical functions of a
typical Clerk General, I find that her position is to be
described as a Clerk General D Atypical.
The effect of my findings in the three areas of
dispute is to award the incumbent 529 points for her position
which places the incumbent in Payband 8. This shall be
effective as of the date of the filing of the grievance.
Interest on any unpaid amounts shall be retroactive to the
date of the filing of the grievance.
Page 16 .
I will remain seised in the event that there is any
difficulty in the implementation of this award.
Dated at Toronto, this 15th day of October, 1991.
~_~
B.A. Kirkwood, Sole Arbitrator
ARBITRATION DATA SHEET - SUPPORT STAFF CLASSIFICATIONS
PRESENT CU~SSIFICATIO~
JOB F~ILY ~D PAYBAND REQUESTED BY GRIEVOR
~OSITION DESCRIPTION FO~:
1. Position Description Form Attached
2. ~-~ Parties agree on contents of attached Position Description Form
~ Union disagrees with contents of attached Position Description Form
SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THIS DISAGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
(USE REVERSE SIDE IF NECESSARY)
AWARD
Management Union Arbitrator
ELEMENTS Rating Pts. Rating Pts. Rating Pts.
, ' GUID'~E RECEIVED O~ i 19 b ':t ~s-O D~ 120
A~ACHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: ~ The Union
~ The College
~IGNA~RES:
FOR THE UNION Fg~NAGEMENT
i qt, o9.. o~
( (Date)
ARBIT~USE: Sept. 24, 199i Oct. 15, 1991
~~aring Date Award Date
SIGNATURE