Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchaillee 97-08-05 IN THE MATTER OF AN EXPEDITED CLASSIFICATION ARBITRATION BETWEEN: ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 418 (hereinafter called the Union) - and - ST. LAWRENCE COLLEGE (hereinafter called the College) - and - MS. GLENNA SCHAILLEE (hereinafter called the Grievor) SOLE ARBITRATOR PROFESSOR IAN A. HUNTER APPEARANCES: FOR THE UNION: Ms. Sara Manoll, President O.P.S.E.U., Local 418 FOR THE COLLEGE: Ms. Cindy Bleakney, Human Resources Officer A HEARING WAS HELD IN KINGSTON, ONTARIO ON AUGUST 21, 1997 1 AWARD (1) Introduction The grievance of Glenna Schaillee is dated December 7, 1995 and alleges improper classification as a Support Services Officer A, Payband 8 (Exhibit 1). The Grievor worked as an Accounting Assistant in the Finance Department of St. Lawrence College from May, 1995 until she left on a maternity leave on October 11, 1996. This is the position and period of time at issue in this arbitration. The parties exchanged briefs and the grievance was heard at an expedited arbitration in Kingston, Ontario on August 21, 1997. (2) The P.D.F. (Exhibit 2) The P.D.F. was agreed between the parties. The Position Summary, which is consistent with the oral evidence, is as follows (Exhibit 2): Prepares month-end bank reconciliations, collects through an invoicing system all monies owed to the College to ensure accurate and up-to-date monthly and year-end financial statements. The Duties and Responsibilities are generally consistent with the evidence given by the Grievor (with minor variations, such as the fact that the Grievor never did O.C.I.S. Statements). The core 2 duties of the position, as described in the P.D.F., are as follows (Exhibit 2): Approximate % of Time Annually 1. Reconciles all College bank accounts (approx. 34% 14), prepares analysis of bank deposits, records cash receipts and sales journals, makes journal entries required to balance bank accounts, voids cheques. Liaison with Computer Services re preparation and balancing of monthly financial statements. Developing/recommends improvements in automated systems design. 2. Assists and advises the Officer, Operational Accounting 15% and the Director of Finance in preparation of year-end file, working papers, financial statements, OCIS statements and reports. (Internal and external reporting requirements), with the prime function of developing/recommending ways and means of incorporating procedures which will safeguard assets. 3. Authorizes voucher jackets prepared by Accounts Payable 14% Clerks up to $5,000. (In absence of Officer, Operational Accounting does 100%). 4. Responsible for all College Invoicing: 14% - prepares, issues, and records all invoices for monies owed to the College - ensures departmental procedures are developed to analyse accounts receivable and develop proper aging of accounts - ensures all SIS (Student Information System) sponsor invoicing is done on a regular basis, recorded in SIS and that sponsor queries are satisfied - follows up on the collection of monies on a timely basis - initiates remedial action directly with the College's Collection Agency 5. Performs other duties such as: 14% - verifies the correctness of all SIS refunds before releasing for payment - processes all benefit payment request cheques - maintains all monthly accounting binders - retrieves overnight reports from Computer Services and verifies that no errors exist in CUFS Quality Assurance Reports and initiates corrective action if errors occur - analyses accounts and prepares reports for various presentations .... 3 (3) The Arbitration Data Sheet (Exhibit 3) MANAGEMENT UNION Level Points Level Points 1. Training/Technical Skills 6 110 6 110 2. Experience 3 32 3 32 3. Complexity 3 41 5 74 4. Judgement 4 66 5 84 5. Motor Skills C3 25 C3 25 6. Physical Demand 3 28 3 28 7. Sensory Demand 4 39 4 39 8. Strain from Work Pressures/ Demands/Deadlines 3 28 3 28 9. Independent Action 4 46 4 46 10. Communications/Contacts 2 52 3 88 11. Responsibility for Decisions/Actions 3 44 4 62 12. Work Environment 1 10 1 10 PAYBAND/TOTAL POINTS 8 521 9 626 JOB CLASSIFICATION SSOA SSOB (4) Job Family There is no dispute between the parties that the Accounting Assistant position belongs to the Support Services Officer Job Family. That Family "covers positions that perform administrative duties that are functional/project oriented rather than task oriented and involve conceptualizing, facilitating and project managing". The College has classified the position Support Services Officer A; the Union contends that it should be Support Services Officer B. As I read the Job Family Definitions the main 4 differences I note between the Support Services Officer B and the Support Services Officer A are these: - interactive versus reactive liaison function; - training responsibilities; - represents College at certain functions. The above three aspects of the position are characteristic of a Support Services Officer B rather than a Support Services Officer A. From the evidence of the Grievor, Glenna Schaillee and her Supervisor, Jim Marchand, I am not persuaded that any of these aspects are required in the position of Accounting Assistant. Accordingly I accept the College's classification of the position as Support Services Officer A as correct. (5) Factors in Dispute (a) Complexity The Job Evaluation Manual provides the following Factor Definition: This factor measures the amount and nature of analysis, problem-solving, and reasoning required to perform job-related duties. This factor measures the conceptual demands of the job as characterized by: - analysis and interpretation required for problem and solution definition, - creativity, 5 - mental challenge, - degree of job structure, - planning activities, and - the variety and difficulty of tasks. The College has evaluated Complexity as Level 3: Job duties require the performance of various routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. The Union submits that the correct evaluation is Level 5: Job duties require the performance of complex and relatively unusual tasks involving specialized processes and/or methods. The essential responsibilities of this position are: (a) doing month and year-end bank reconciliations; and (b) dealing with accounts receivable. From the Grievor's own evidence, I concluded that the position requires the incumbent to perform various routine, complex tasks in connection with both of these responsibilities; the Grievor does so by applying generally accepted accounting principles. I heard no evidence, from either the Grievor or her Supervisor, to persuade me that the tasks were "relatively unusual" or involve "specialized processes and/or methods". Of course, general principles of accounting will seem "specialized" and 6 "relatively unusual" to a layman; but not to applicants who have the minimum Training/Technical Skills for the position specified in the P.D.F.. I asked the Grievor what was the "most unusual" task required by the position? She replied: "Closing out dead files. Arranging for their shredding and carrying them out for shredding". This is not a "relatively unusual task involving specialized processes and/or methods". I asked the Grievor what was the "most complex" task required by the position? She replied: "Making the two systems (S.I.S. - Student Information System; and C.U.F.S. - College Unified Financial System) "jive together". She went on to explain difficulties in downloading information from one system to another, emphasizing systems problems, and then she added: "We may have to talk to Computer Services to see how an entry is being accepted." While I accept that computer and system problems are difficult to master, they are not the kind of "complex and relatively unusual tasks" to which Level 5 speaks. I asked the Grievor what was her most difficult task? She replied .... Trying to effect change". She went on to explain that when she came into the Finance Department in May 1995 most of the reconciliation and accounts payable functions were done manually; 7 the Grievor brought considerable computer skills into the department, and I accept her evidence that getting colleagues to accept new computerized processes was difficult. But this is not a conceptual demand of the job. Indeed the P.D.F. does not require the incumbent to introduce innovative systems. The Grievor did that, and for that the Department and the College should be grateful; but the Manual instructs me to consider only the position, not the incumbent, in rating a factor (Section VII, page 4). I asked the Grievor what was the "most specialized" task she did? After a long pause, she answered that the College bank reconciliations were the most specialized because of the "large size - up to 3,500 cheques per month". Yet her Supervisor, Mr. Marchand, testified that this was "a routine process". He said: "You need to know how to do reconciliations. The number of cheques involved is large, but the elements of reconciliation are routine". The incumbent, he went on, must know "basic accounting principles"; but the incumbent does "the same things, day in and day out". I have concluded that while the volume of reconciliations is large, the conceptual demands and mental challenge of the position is adequately addressed by Level 3. Complexity - Level 3 8 (b) Judqement The Job Evaluation Manual provides the following Factor Definition: This factor measures the independent judgement and problem-solving required on the job. It assesses the difficulty in identifying various available 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 has rated Judgement Level 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. The Union submits the correct evaluation is Level 5: Job duties require a significant degree of judgement. Problem-solving involves interpreting complex data or refining work methods and techniques to be used. From the oral evidence I concluded that the position required "considerable" judgement. Both of the core functions (i.e. bank reconciliations and accounts payable) require the incumbent to deal with a variety of conventional, recurrent problems by using 9 well established accounting techniques. This seems to me to fall squarely within Level 4. I asked the Grievor to give me examples of when she would be required to interpret data. She did so but none involved "complex" data. The Grievor explained how she had refined "work methods and techniques" in moving the Department from manual to computer spreadsheets. I accept that evidence, but reiterate that this was not a requirement of the position, albeit it is greatly to the Grievor's credit. I questioned Jim Marchand about the judgement required. He has supervised the position from its inception in about 1985. He described the judgement required as "moderate" (Level 3). He considered that the occasion which would require the highest judgement was collecting College receivables - "knowing when to press [for payment], when to back off". In my view Level 4 adequately addresses the Judgement factor. Judgement - Level 4 10 (c) Communications/Contacts The Job Evaluation Manual provides the following Factor Definition: This factor measures the requirement for effective communication for the purpose of providing advice, explanation, influencing others, and/or reaching agreement. Consideration is given to the nature and purpose of the communication and the confidentiality of information involved. Note to Ra%ers Many college jobs deal with some information that is confidential. The focus in this factor is on the manner, purpose and responsibilities involved in communicating, rather than the content of the information being communicated. Therefore, raters should not rate the information, but the communications responsibilities involved in handling it. The College has rated this factor Level 2: Job duties require communication for the purpose 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 confidential information which has minor disclosure implications. The Union submits that it should be classified Level 3: 11 Job duties require communication for the purpose of providing guidance or technical advice of a detailed or specialized nature, or for the purpose of explaining various matters by interpreting procedures, policy, or theory. There may be need to promote participation and understanding and to secure co-operation in order to respond to problems or situations of a sensitive nature. Regular involvement with confidential information which has moderate disclosure implications. I questioned the Grievor and Mr. Marchand on each component element of the definition. On each element I found that Level 2 was the "best fit". For example, I heard no evidence that the Grievor's job duties require her to provide "technical advice of a detailed or specialized nature"; she does not interpret (but she does apply) College policy and procedures; there is some element of promoting good relations in sensitive situations (eg. accounts payable) but this is adequately embraced by Level 2. She does see confidential information (eg. garnishee orders; student debits, etc.) but the information has only minor disclosure implications. Mr. Marchand testified that the position's access to confidential budget information would be "rare" and the worst consequence would be that he (as Director of Finance) might communicate erroneous information to the Board. I am satisfied that Communications/Contacts is properly evaluated Level 2. 12 Communications/Contacts - Level 2 (d) Responsibility for Decisions and Actions The Job Evaluation Manual provides the following Factor Definition: 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 has evaluated this factor Level 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. The Union submits that the correct evaluation is Level 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. From the evidence of both the Grievor and her Supervisor, I concluded (a) that the Grievor's decisions have a moderate, not a 13 considerable, impact on the organization; (b) her errors would usually be detected either by the reconciliations or by review by the auditors; and (c) if undetected, the worst result would be a limited waste of College financial resources. Accordingly, I hold that this factor is properly, evaluated Level 3. Responsibility for Decisions/Actions - Level 3 (6) Arbitrator's Core Point Rating Level Points Training/Technical Skills 6 110 Experience 3 32 Complexity 3 41 Judgement 4 66 Motor Skills C3 25 Physical Demand 3 28 Sensory Demand 4 39 Strain from Work Pressures/ Demands/Deadlines 3 28 Independent Action 4 46 Communications/Contacts 2 52 Responsibility for Decisions/Actions 3 44 Work Environment 1 10 Total 521 Payband 8 (7) Note In her evidence, the Grievor made an allegation of gender bias against either the Finance Department or unnamed individuals within 14 it. In closing argument, Ms. Manoll urged me to give weight to this allegation. I cannot do so. First, I was appointed as expedited arbitrator to decide the correct classification of a position; I was not appointed by the parties to hear a grievance alleging discrimination. Second, the allegation was neither particularized nor corroborated. Third, the arbitrator-driven model for expedited classification would be most unsuitable for a fair resolution of such an allegation. Finally, there exist other avenues open to the Grievor (through the grievance procedure or the Ontario Human Rights Code) to have such an allegation heard and determined. (8) Disposition For all of the foregoing reasons, the grievance of Glenna Schaillee (Exhibit 1) is hereby dismissed. 15 rbitrator