HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-1052.Jalea & Green.92-05-13 ONTA RIO EMPLO YES DE LA COURONNE
CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L'ONTA RIO
GRIEVANCE C,OMMISSION DE
SETILEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS
180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2100, TORONTO, ONTARtO, MSG lZ8 TELEPHONE/T~L~PHONE: (416] 326- 1388
~0, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, BUREAU 2~, TORONTO (ONTARIO). M5G tZ8 FACSIf~/LE/T~L~COPIE : r4~6) 326-~396
1052/89, 1055/89
IN THE ~TTER OF ~ ~IT~TION
Un,er
~ CRO~ ~P~EH COL~CTI~ B~INXNG aCT
Before
~ GRI~CB OETT~~ BO~
BE~EN
oPsEu (Ja~ea/Green)
Grievor
The Cro~ in ai~h~ of Ontario
(Minist~ of Correctional Se~ices)
Employer
BEFO~: W.' ~w Vice-Chai~erson
I.. Thomson Me~er
D. Halpe~ Me. er
FOR THE V. Reaume
GRIEVOR Counsel
Cavalluzzo, Hayes & Shilt0n
Barristers & Solicitors
FORTHE J. Benedict
EMPLOYER Manager, Staff Relations and Compensations..
Ministry of Correctional Services
HEARING May 24, 1991
September 4, 5, 1991
April 9, 1992
DECiSiON
The Grievors, Raymond Jalea and Robert Green, are
employed by the Ministry of Correctional Services at the Mimico
medium-maximum security facili%y. Mr. Jalea is classified as
Clerk 2, Supply and Mr. Green as Clerk 6, Supply. Both grieve that
they are improperly classified and seek a Berry order.
The preamble to the class standard provides as ~follows:'
"These classes cover the positions of employees who
· perform a Variety of Cl. erical, manual, administrative
repair or purchasing functions that are co'~mon to
stockkeeping operatiohs in the Provincial Government
Service. If any emploYee specializes in only one of the
many tasks involved inthe operation of a stockroom, the
position should be classified in another series more
appropriate to the type of work. For example, p~sitions
concerned entirely with the clerical recording, of
transactions should be allocated to the.Clerk,!IGeneral
series° Positions in which purchasing is the main
functions should not be classified in this seri~s.
Many factors, such as!the maintenance .of the necessary
ledger or other records', inventory control, establishment
of minimum - maximum requirements etc., are common to all
stockrooms and vary significantly only to the extlent that
the size of the stockkeeping function varies. Thus, the
overriding criterion in making allocations in thi'$ series
is the size, as defined in this preamble !!of the
stockkeeping function'rather than any variatio~ in the
clerical or administrative functions associated with it.
Supervisory positions covered by the classes Cl~rk 3 to
Clerk 6, Supply will be assigned to one class h%gher in
the series if purchasing, as defined below, is one of the
function requiring a m~nimum of 20% of the workihg time.
DEFINITION:
Size of Operation:
Because of the tremendous variatio'n in the nature and
organization of stockkeeping functions [ibetween
departments, the number of staff required for the
operation of a particular unit is the .only p~a~tical
basis of comparison for classification purposes, in all
departments except Health and Reform InstitutionSl'. In the
latter departments', patients or inmates are often
employed in stockkeeping operations. Consequently in
Ontario Hospitals, the size, in terms of bed capacity, is
the criteria used. The size alone of a Reform
Institution ignores the possible existence of industries,
which complicate the stockkeeping function, therefore the
value of annual stock turnover is used as a basis of
comparison for the determination of level.
Stockrooms having less than 100 different tvDes of stock
are, for the purpose of this class series, considered to
be equivalent to specific specialized sections of larger
stockrooms, and the positions will be classified
accordingly."
"Supervision:
Positions supervised include only those filled by
temporary or permanent'Civil Servants'or by continuously
employed public servants who report to the supervisor for
discipline, work assignment and administrative control.
This includes all clerk supply, clerk general, machine
operating, clerk messenger and driver positions concerned
in the overall operation of the duties assigned to the
stockroom supervisor.
No credit for supervision will be given for no~-
continuous help, or for employees temporarily on loan-
from other organiza'tions. Neither is credit given for
employees who report to the supervisor purely for
administrative convenience, when these employees are not
involved in the operations of the stockroom or any of the
auxiliary duties assigned to it."
The description for Clerk 2, Supply is as follows:
"CLASS DEFINITION:
This class covers 'the positions of employees performing
a variety of routine manual and clerical duties in
stockrooms. Under general supervision, they carry out a
number of the various tasks connected with the receiving,
storage, handling and distribution of a wide variety of
equipment and supplies. They check incoming shipments
against weigh bills for shortage and damage in transit;
check quantities against .packing slips and purchase
orders; contact suppliers regarding short shipments,
delays, back orders etc.; place items on shelves Or bins,
adjusting bin cards to keep perpetual inventory. They
also maintain stock ledgers or cards showing the receipt
and issue of all articles including the value of items on
hand. They assemble orders for authorized requl~ltlons;
tag and address shipments; contact the conveyor and
complete necessary records for the transaction. ~i
This is a terminal class for employees who perform in a
supply area, simple clerical duties in conjunction with
tasks requiring the frequent application of~considerable
physical effort or the operation of mechanical
equipment"
The definition for Clerk 6, Supply is as follow~:
"CLASS DEFINITION:
This class covers the 0ositions of employees wnq, = r
general supervision, ar% responsible forithe operation of
a large stockroom with~five to nine subordinates. They
ensure the careful checking of incoming sto~k, the
shipment of stock against authorized requisitionS:and the
neatness and. security~of the Stockroom. They{~ decide
minimum maximum requirements; reqUisition supplies;
maintain a perpetual i~ventoryand complete stoc~ ledger
records; prepare reports of the operation for the
supervisor. Their 'responsibilities often iinclude
supervision of the departmental printing and m~il and
messenger services.
This class also covers! the positions of-supervisors in
charge of a centralized'stockkeeping operation in,,Ontario
Hospitals of over five;hundred bed capacity.
This class covers the p.ositions of supervisors i~ reform
institutions in charge of centralized stockkeeping
operations with an annual stock turnover-value i~f more
than $300,000 and less:than $900,000"
Revised' October 1964
Both Grievors receive the custodial allowance .Provided
for in Appendix .8 of the Collective Agreement which stipulates as
follows:
4
"September 23, 1985
Mr. A. Todd
Chief Negotiator
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
1901 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M4S 2Z5.
Dear M~. Todd:
-Re: Appendix 8
(See also Article 5 - Pay Administration,
Section 5.9 - Custodial Responsibility Allowance)
This will confirm that effective January 1, 1984 a
Custodial Responsibility Allowan6e of two thousand
'dollars ($2,000.00) per year is payable to employees of
the Ministry of Correctional Services and employees
· working in training schools operated by the Ministry of
Community and Social Services, in addition to the rate of
pay specified for the class of the positions to which
they are assigned, provided they fulfill all of the
following requirements;
(a) they are not professional staff such as teachers,
nurses, social workers or.psychologists;
(b) the positions to which the emplOyees.are assigned
are not covered by classes which already take into
account responsibility for the control of inmates
'or wards, such as Correctional Officers, Industrial
Officers, Supervisors of Juveniles, Observation and
Detention Home Workers, Recreation officers
(Correctional Services), Trade Instructors and
Provincial Bailiffs;
(c) (i) they are required, for the major portion of
their working time, to direct inmates or wards
engaged in beneficial labour;
(ii) as group leaders/lead hands, they are directly
responsible, for the major portion of their
working time, for operations involving the
control of a number of inmates or wards
engaged in beneficial labour;
~ and
(d) they are responsible for the custody of inmates or
wards in their charge and are required to report on
their conduct and lay charges where breaches of
institutional regulations occur.
The Custodial Responsibility Allowance Shall be
paid according to the base rate of pay .for the
class involved.
- weekly rated classes- $3$.40/week
- hourly rated classes'- ~.
- 40 hour week - 96 cents/hour
- 36 1/4 hour week - $1.06/hour :,'
Yours truly,
P. Mo0ney
Senior Staff Relations Officer".
It is the Grievers' ,position that duties Which they
perform are not encompassed either in the job specificatio~}s or the
class standards, and with respect to Mr. Green, that he is
responsible for a very large sto.ckroom contemplated in theli Clerk 7
standard as opposed to a large stockroom contemplated in the Clerk
6 standard. .
The evidence discloses'that Mr. Green is in chargle of the
stockroom at Mimico which has o.~er 400 stock items, in p~rpetual
inventory in four warehouses. Mr. Green is Mr. Jalea's sup~risor,
and it appears that the two of them are the stockroom cler~ staff.
The bulk of the heavy physical labour is performed by inmat'es. Mr.
Green and Mr. Jalea are responsible for escorting the four to six
inmates who are to work under their supervision to and from their
duties. Between the two of th~m, the Grievers' 'Show thei:inmates
what they are to do in the stockroom and how to do'it. They report
6
misconduct and, on occasion, take part in 'strip searches of
inmates.
In addition to the inmate helpers, Mr. Green has had a
summer student in 1989 under his charge and, on occasion, one or
two periodic helpers from the project 1000 program whom he trained
in stores work. As part of the supervisory and training, aspects of
· his work, Mr. Green is required from time to time to provide a
written assessment of those working under his supervision. Mr.
Green aiso has day-to-day de facto supervision of the canteen
clerk, although the canteen clerk is notofficially assigned as one
of his subordinates.
Additionally, Mr. Green was assigned for a short period
in 1988 to train the accounts payable clerk and to do the movable
assets inventory. In th~ result, however, Mr. Green was not
actually required.to carry out this inventory function although he
did co-ordinate the distribution of movable assets stored by Mimico
for other facilities.
Both. Grievors are required to be acquainted with first
aid and occupational health and safety matters and both are peace
officers.
Mr. Jalea was referred to as Mr. Green's second-in-
command and filled in for Mr. Green when he was on vacation. Mr.
Jalea also filled in for the canteen clerk when necessary. Mr.
Jalea also exorcised his judcfl~tent in the place of Mr. Greeh in the
ordinary conduct of stockroom activities when Mr. Greenliwas not
immediately available.
On the foregoing factual matters, there was little in
contention. Somewhat more problematic was the question'of ~the size
of the stockroom. Classification of supply clerks is deter~ined in
reform institutions to a large degree by the value of annual stock
turnover.
Mr. Gre'en testified that he believed the annual stock
turnover to be $2 million. The employer called Mr. Roy Chart and
Mr'. Ronald Brett who, referring to the" stock turnover ~eports,
'testified that the stock turnover for the fiscal year ending 1989
was $1,228,424.00~2 It was $1,316,250.00 the pre~ious ye~ir. Mr.
Chan testified also that all material processed by Mr. Green was
accounted for in the stock turnover report, and there, is no
evidence to dislodge this testimony. I do not accept-Mr.:iGreen's
evidence as to the value of the stock turnover asli it is
unsubstantiated and appeared to be an approximation mader by Mr.
Green without reference to any 15urchasing records. As w~ll, his
.!
testimony as to the $2 million figure was for the year 1990-1991
which post-dates the grievance. 'I accept the evidence of Mrl Chan
·
and of Mr. Brett as to the annual stock turnover values for the
relevant periods of time.
.The second ~ssue is whether the Stock turnover figures
shown in the class standards must be indexed to account for
inflation, and if so, by what factor. It was urged upon us by the
Union that no indexing should be allowed on the stock turnover
figures, and,that we must apply .the class standards as we find
them. - As the turnover amount clearly exceeds even the Clerk 7
standard, this would automatically take Mr. Green out of the Clerk
6 standard and over the threshold into the Clerk 7 standard,
subject' to the argument that the class as a whole is not
appropriate at' all. This appears to lead, howeger, to a result
which the draftsmen in my view cannot have intended.
If one were to give effect to the Union's argument, then.
supply clerks, otherwise properly classified, would suddenly become
improperlyclassified simplyby reason of'the effects of inflation
without any change to their duties or functions. Likewise, in a
'deflationary period, a similar result would occur to the effect
that a supply clerk would come to merit a lower rating, again
without any change in his actual duties. This strikes me as an
untenable manner of construing the class standard, and in my view
ought not to be adopted. Indexing of the values for stock turnover
should be done and the factor used should be uniform and reflect
the change in the value of stock attributable to increases or
decreases in the consumer price index. The employer has computed
the 1988 and 1989 equivalents to the 1964 values set out. in the
class standard. The consumer price index base year used is 1981
which is assigned a value of 100. The 1964 equivalent was computed
as 33.2 and the 1988 equivalent lis 143.8. The 1989 equivalent is
151. The reSulting multiplier for 1988 vis-a-vis'1964 is therefore
4.331 and the 1989 multiplier is 4.548. The Clerk 7 threshold is
therefore $3,897,000.00 for 19881 and $4,093,200.00 for 1989.
'rn the job specification for Clerk 6, Supply, however,
'the employer shows an equivalency of $1,438,950.00 for the year
1986-87 which is not consistent! with the equivalency arrived at
using the multi, pliers of 4.33i for 1988 and 4.548 f'°r 1989
(assuming a slight rather than a gross increase in the consumer
price index between 1986-87 and 1987-88). However,~ even if 6ne uses
the lower equivalenc~ of $1,438,950.00 for -1986-87, thd actual
stock turnover of $1,248,260.00. in 1986-87 did not exceed the
~quivalent:. nor did the actuai' turnover for each of ithe two
succeeding years. I find therefore that on the basis 6f stock
turnover, Mr. Green is.not improperly classified
The threshold test in a classification grievance is
whether or not the core duties of; the griever fall within the class
standard. If the griever's.core duties are not contemplated in the
class standard~ then a finding ?ay be made that he is improperly
classified and belongs in a different class, or alternatively that
he is improperly classified and no existing class Properly
contemplates the substance of his functions and. therefor,e a new
class must be created. At the outset, it should be recognized that
10
neither the class-standards nor the job specifications will attempt
to.be an encyclopedic description of the activities carried out by
the Ministry's employees. The question is not therefore whether or
not there exist duties and activities performed by the grievor
which are not mentioned in the class standard, but rather, is the
substanceor core of the grievor's duties so at variance.with that
set out in the class standard that the'standard'cannot fairly'be
said to describe the grievor's role in the organization..
~Applying this criterion~ and taking into account the
provisions of the custodial allowance at Appendix 8 of the
Collective Agreement, I am not able to conclude that the Grievors'
activities are not comprehended by the term "variety of clerical,
manual, administrative, repair or purchasing functions that are
common to stockkeeping operations..." as expanded by ~he duties and
activities- contemplated by .the custodial allowance found at
Appendix'8. The language of Appendix 8 expressly requires the
employee to be one who directs inmates engaged in beneficial
labour, is responsible for the control of a number of inmates, and
is responsible for the custody of inmates in his charge.
These grievances rely chiefly on duties carried out in
relation to inmates, which duties, being covered by Appendix 8, I
do not find support the claim for reclassification. Insofar as the
grievances rely on duties which are not expressed in the class
standard and are not dealt with in Appendix 8, I am not able to
accede to the proposition that they so'change the core d'.Uties of
each of the Grievors that the standards' do not properly classify
them. In the case of Mr. Green', I find the stock, turnover to be
within the Clerk 6 parameters and the activities of adminlistering
the moveable assets, procuremen~ of supplies for.the sign~hop and
'laundry, and supervision 'and training, of the' occasiona~ summer -
student or periodic helper to b9 within the contemplatio~ of the
range of duties to be expected Of a person who is responsi~ble for
the operation Of a large store room with five to nine subordinates.
:
As for Mr. Jalea, reference is made to the :IClerk 4
classification in respect of his role as "second in command".
However, when one looks to the Clerk 4 standard,, the description
continues as follows: '
"This class also covers .positions of employees ilwho are
second in charge of a large stockroom where the
organization is not broken down into recognized ~nits as
above. To qualify for this classification positibns must
have continuous responsibility for the efficiency of the
operations, work assignments and solution of da~ to day
problems and would assume supervisory charge, of the
stockroom during the supervisors absence."
There was no evidence before us that Mr, Jalea Performed
all of the functions referred to!in the foregoing part oft.he Clerk
4 standard. In any case, the question is not whether the Grlevor's
'duties resemble in some instances those described in a different
class standard, but whether or not the class standard to Which he
'
is assigned properly describes 'his functions. On the ~vidence
before us, I do not find that it can properly be said that these
12
Grievors are improperly classified 'once Appendix 8 of the
Collective Agreement is taken into account. The 'grievances will
therefore be dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 13th~day of ray, 1992.