HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnion 04-03-19
IVI a Y I ~ LUU4 I U 4.:lAM U~HAWA KtblUNAL U~~ILt I~ 0 L I I ti ~ L
~
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARIHTRA TION
BETWEEN:
M1.11licipal Property Assessment Corporation
- and -
!
OPSEU
(Multiple Grievances Relating to Senior Valuation Analyst (PAS) Job Competitions)
Before: William Kaplan
Sole Arbitrator
Appearances
For the Employer Doug Gray
Hicks Morle~ ~ton Stewart Stone LLP
Barristers &: onptors
I
,
!
Daniel Fogel \
Hicks Morley =ton Stewart Storie LLP
Barristers & So .. -tors
!
For the Union. Peggy Snuth
Elliot Smith
Barristers & Soli ~torg
t
Anne Lee
Grievance Officer, OPSEU
i
I
TIus matter proceeded to a hearing in Toronto on ~ebruary 17, 2004, and March 8, 2004.
i
I
i
i
,
!
i
l
I
,
!
i
r
J
I~ 0 L lid P j
1'/1 a y I ~ LUU4 I U 4.:lAM U~HAWA Kt~IU~AL Ur~ILt
.
2
Introduction
In May 2001, MPAC announced a major reorganization. As part of tIns reorganIZation, a
number of new bargaining urut positions were filled through a competitive process,
including the position of Senior Valuation Analyst (PAS) Almost 1000 employees
applied for this posinon, and 556 of the applicants proceeded to an interview before a
job competition panel. Interviews were conducted. across the province m January and
~
February 2002. By early March 70 job offers were tnade and accepted A large number
of grievances were subsequently filed. Given the tolume of grievances in this job
competition and in several others occurring at thJsame time, the parties negotiated a
.
protocol for their expeditious and fair resolution ih a process of mediation/ arbitration.
i
The PAS job competition grievances proce~ded fir~ 'at a hearing held in Toronto on
February 17, 2004, and March 8, 2004. The parties lvere advised, before any case was
heard, that it was my view, having carefully consBered the collecnve agreement, the
submissions of the parties, and the governing aU~lorities, that the first step in the
,
process was for the cand1dates to establish relativJ equality It was also my view that
absent exceptional circwnstances, the assessment kould be based on interview scores.
t
Finally, Jt was indicated to the parties that remedy would be tailored as appropriate.
:
All potenhally affected incumbents were notified Of these proceedmgs and their right to
attend and participate. Appropriate arrangementst-for disclosure were made. A large
number of incumbents did attend and made reprdsent:1.tions. These representations,
together with the detailed wntten briefs of the pa~es and the submiSsions made by
union counsel, the grievors, and management cou.'1sel at the heanng, have all been
ij
110 L 1 I 0 r 't
MaY \ ~ LUUl\ \ U l\0!-\1'Il U~nRWR ~t~IUNRL Urr\~t
,;-
3 .I"
given careful consideration. It should be noted that a nwnber of thes~ grievances were
resolved, obvIating any need for a hearing. One PAS grievance was adjourned because
the grievor was unwell. It may be rescheduled fot' a hearmg at a bme convenient to the
grievor and the parties.
~ ..
:i.
Award
Except as follows, all grievances are dismissed.
1. Susan Lutes awarded the next PAS position in Fatm/Residential/Multi-Residential.
l~t,
2. Ron Franklin awarded the next PAS position in tase Management.
Ji-
3. Patrick Bond awarded the next PAS position in ~ommercia1. Bond also awarded $1000
'''J
:1"
less deductions required by law to be paid within iurty days.
,.
r,'
4. Lori, Whitworth awarded the next PAS position ~ Vacant Land
~;
S Roman Andrezejewski awarded the next PAS pdSition in Vacant Land.
~,
j,.
3:'
~.
Conclusion t
I remain seized with respect to the imPler.hentatiol of this award
p.
t;
.,
DATED at Toronto this 15th day of March 2004.. tr'
'-
p.;t/ II"
t
"
:l-
I!.
;
:J"
;~
William Kaplan, Sole ArbItrator
"
Ii..
i
.!t.
~'
,~
~:
f;:
~!:
I.
'Ii.
J(
td