Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCampbell 07-01-12 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: FANSHAWE COLLEGE and ("the employer") ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION ("the union") AND IN THE MATTER OF A CLASSIFICATION GRIEVANCE OF TRUDY CAMPBELL - OPSEU FILE #410928 ARBITRATOR: APPEARANCES For the Employer: For the Union: Ian Springate Sheila Wilson David Smith Marg Rae Jean Fordyce HEARING: In London on December 4,2006 2 DECISION INTRODUCTION The grievor is the only full-time employee in the College's clothing store. Her job title is that of Sales and Customer Service Clerk. The employer classifies her position as that of a Clerk Atypical at payband 5. On September 14, 2004 the grievor filed a grievance which claimed that she was improperly classified. She contended that she should be classified as a Clerk General D at payband 8. At the hearing the appropriate rating of the grievor's position was addressed on the basis of the job evaluation system in place at the time the grievance was filed. The parties agreed on the ratings for two of the twelve job factors under that system, namely sensory demand and communications/contacts. Each of the remaining ten factors is discussed separately below. The employer's ratings for all twelve job factors totaled 349 points. This is within the 331 to 390 point range for payband 5. The union rated the position at 522 points, within the 511 to 570 point range for payband 8. The two intervening paybands are payband 6 covering a range of 391 to 450 points and payband 7 with a range of 451 to 510 points. The employer prepared a position description form ("PDF") with respect to the grievor's position. The union prepared its own proposed PDF which mirrored much of the employer's PDF although with some changes. THE CLOTHING STORE The grievor testified that when she was hired full-time by the employer in 1984 the clothing store was located in the comer of the bookstore. She said that the store subsequently moved to a former classroom, then to a retail outlet and then to a larger retail outlet. In a section of the union's brief written by the grievor she wrote: "the reason for the dispute in the pay band classification is the entire revamping of the clothing area of retail services". She said that each change in location of the clothing store was necessitated by increasing sales and "our" approach to merchandising which "has required changes in the skills required to maintain the store and help in the upwardly spiraling sales". In her evidence the grievor noted that in addition to clothing and other merchandise the store sells uniforms that students in certain programs are required to wear, including 3 students in cooking and nursing. She said that the store also sells a dental hygienist kit which due to its cost is kept behind the counter. Mr. David Smith is the employer's Manager of Retail Services. He has overall responsibility for the clothing store, which does about half a million dollars of business annually. He is also responsible for a computer store which does $4 million in business, a bookstore which does $7.5 million in business and two variety stores. In addition, he acts as the employer's liaison with various food service providers. Ms. Nancy Chipps Drummond is based in the bookstore. She is classified as a Support Services Officer ("SSO") at payband 11. She is also designated a lead hand. Mr. Smith described her as the operations lead hand for the book store, the clothing store and the two convenience stores. He testified that Ms. Chipps Drummond hires, trains and schedules part-time staff. There are two SSOs at the payband 10 level based in the bookstore, namely Ms. Kim Pineo and Ms. Jan Gavin. Mr. Smith described them as the two main buyers. He said that Ms. Gavin purchases textbooks while Ms. Pineo purchases supplies and merchandise, including clothing. He also said that Ms. Pineo provides leadership and schedules activities in the clothing store and deals with vendors. At one point in his evidence he described Ms. Pineo as the buyer and the director of what goes on in the clothing store. The grievor testified that she runs the day-to-day operations of the clothing store. The spokesperson for the union subsequently suggested to Mr. Smith that the grievor runs the clothing store. He disagreed saying that she works in the store. The union spokesperson asked Mr. Smith if Ms. Pineo runs the day-to-day operations in the clothing store. He replied that he goes to her with issues involving the clothing store, and so yes she does. Immediately after this, however, Mr. Smith made the statement that he runs the clothing store. Due in large measure to the issue of who runs the clothing store the union spokesperson asked that the grievance be referred to a classification arbitration board so that the union could lead evidence from a number of witnesses and address issues of credibility. During a discussion related to this issue, in which the spokespersons for the parties as well as the grievor and Mr. Smith actively participated, it became apparent that there was little disagreement about who actually did what with respect to the operation of the clothing store. Rather, disagreement related primarily to how certain functions should be characterized. One example related to the issue of responsibility for making decisions about merchandise displays. Mr. Smith said that he would prefer it if all display issues went through Ms. Pineo. He acknowledged, however, that at times the grievor takes the lead on displays. The grievor said that she does not receive any 4 direction from Ms. Pineo. She also said, however, that at times Ms. Pineo makes' suggestions respecting what she wants to have displayed and she then displays the item. Once it became clear that the apparently different evidence given by the grievor and Mr. Smith primarily related to issues of characterization and not issues of credibility the union withdrew its request to have the grievance referred to an arbitration board. THE GRIEVOR'S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The grievor and two part-time employees work in the clothing store. The grievor is responsible for opening and closing the store. The parties agree that the grievor spends about 45% of her time performing the role of a sales clerk. This involves assisting customers and ringing up sales on a point of sale computer system. In her evidence the grievor indicated that many purchases are paid for using a credit or a debit card. The grievor testified that she and the part-time employees do receiving, put out stock, bag excess stock and store it and also re-stock items from the storage area. She noted that she and the part-time employees put prices and security tags on merchandise. According to the grievor they try to showcase new products as they come in but also rotate stock so that everything gets up front at some point in time. The grievor testified that when she notices that a particular item is not attracting much attention she puts it up front to display it. She said that if this does not work the price is reduced and if the item still does not sell it is moved to a clearance center. Mr. Smith testified that there is a strict policy in place with respect to markups. He said that any price changes are made by the buyer in consultation with himself although store staff do provide input. He noted that the clearance center was set up a few weeks prior to the hearing after it was proposed by Ms. Pineo. The grievor is not responsible for ordering merchandise but does advise Ms. Pineo of fast-selling items as well as when a particular size of an item is running low. The grievor testified that if there is an item in red that customers ask for in navy she will tell Ms. Pineo that there appears to be a market for the item in navy. The grievor noted that the store stocks several program specific hoodies and if students in other programs show an interest in a similar hoodie she can take an order for twenty or more or ask Ms. Pineo to stock the item in the store. The grievor takes special orders from customers. These include name tags for uniforms as well as graduation rings. Three different companies supply rings to the store. Each of them has a display tray and a binder. Customers can choose between different ring types, what is engraved on the ring as well as a stone. According to the 5 grievor she writes out the order, has the customer verify and sign it and then inputs the information into the computer and collects a payment. The grievor indicated that there are stores which sell College merchandise in Simcoe and Woodstock. Mr. Smith said that orders for these stores should go through Ms. Pineo. He indicated that he was unaware of the grievor having any involvement with the stores. Given the nature of Mr. Smith's evidence I accept the grievor's evidence that each September the store in Simcoe asks her to send them $2,000 worth of product from existing stock she thinks will sell and later the store asks her to send more of particular items. As touched on above, in addition to her role as a sales clerk the grievor prepares in- store displays. Mr. Smith testified that he sees such displays as being as much a part of merchandising as putting items on shelves. He said that recently products have been showcased through theme displays, including at Christmas, Thanksgiving, Halloween and Valentines Day. As noted above, Mr. Smith acknowledged that at times the grievor takes the lead on displays and in her evidence the grievor indicated that she also acts on proposals from Ms. Pineo. Mr. Smith described displays as a team effort. It is clear, however, that the grievor designs the displays. The grievor testified that doing displays was something she had to learn. She said that she went on line to Canadian Tire and looked at the Ikea catalogue to get ideas about what she could do to help market products. Mr. Smith testified that the grievor does well on the displays. The grievor noted that some displays require the purchase of items in order to enhance the products being highlighted. She said that she will ask Mr. Smith for a budget for these items and for a recent Christmas display she had asked him for a budget of $200. The grievor spends some 14% of her time on refunds. Some of these involve the return of clothing. The grievor testified that with clothing she ensures that the item has not been worn or altered. The grievor noted that many refunds handled in the clothing store are for text books. Mr. Smith testified that no refunds are given out in the bookstore due to a concern that someone in the store could grab a book and then claim a refund for it. He said that at the start of the semester in September and January, which is when most refunds occur, a separate booth is staffed by a part-time person who handles textbook refunds. He said that for the remainder of the year refunds are done in the clothing store. The grievor said that for refund requests she has the student fill in a standard form and she then identifies the student using their credit or debit card or a student card and enters the information into the computer. The grievor noted that refunds for books paid for with a debit or credit card are paid out in the same manner. She said that when she 6 has a cart load of returned books she asks someone from the text book area to come and get them. The PDF prepared by the employer notes that when dealing with refunds the grievor "uses discretion within the boundaries of store returns and refund procedures". The PDF proposed by the union states the point somewhat differently, namely that the grievor "uses discretion in grey areas when it comes to returns and refunds". One area of discretion relates to when text books can be returned. The stated policy is that books can be returned up to three weeks after a class starts. The grievor can, however, accept a book that is in good condition after that date. In her evidence the grievor noted that apprenticeship and continuing education courses have different start dates and at times she will verify a claimed start date. The grievor testified that bookstore refunds can be complex, in part because the College sells a lot of books that come in packages with other books or with computer disks or cards. She said that she must verify what was originally in the package. She noted that a text book which forms part of a package might also be sold separately, which can give rise to fraudulent claims. She indicated that fraudulent claims generally are a big concern. She said that students have attempted to return marked up books by erasing their name or cutting out a defaced front page. She indicated that generally she deals with returns on her own but does refer about 5 out of every 50 refund requests to Ms. Gavin. As noted above, there are two part-time employees in the clothing store. The grievor testified that one works from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. five days per week while the other works from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. two days per week. She said that one of the employees works about ten months a year. She said that because the other employee is new she does not know how long Ms. Chipps Drummond will have her working, although it will not be for twelve months. The grievor indicated that Ms. Chipps Drummond is responsible for scheduling the part-time employees and at times these employees have been moved to the bookstore or to a convenience store when they have been busy. Mr. Smith testified that Ms. Chipps Drummond trains new employees and explains their activities to them when they are hired. He said that this includes training them on the Book10g point of sale system. He said that the grievor provides guidance to the part-timers and as the full-time employee she can ask them to help her. This corresponds to the grievor's testimony that she tells the part-time employees what she needs to have done and directs their daily activities. The grievor said that she has to train part-time employees and although the current part-timers came from the bookstore, in the past some have come "fresh". I take it from the evidence that while Ms. Chipps 7 Drummond explains to new part-time employees what is expected of them, including if necessary training them on the Booklog system, the grievor explains and/or demonstrates to them how specific tasks are performed in the clothing store. THE FACTOR OF TRAINING/TECHNICAL SKILLS The job evaluation manual states that his factor measures the minimum amount of independent study, formal education, training programs, professional or technical courses or apprenticeship programs necessary to fulfill the requirements of a position. It also notes that: "The application of this factor should not be confused with the educational qualifications of a particular incumbent." At the hearing the spokesperson for the employer noted that Section In of the applicable job evaluation manual states that the College is to structure a position and that the College "determines the qualification and skill level required to do the job". The employer rated the grievor's position for the factor of training/technical skills at level 3, which is worth 52 points. The union contends that it should be rated at level 4 worth 71 points. The level definitions as well as illustrative classifications for these levels set out in the job evaluation manual read as follows: 3. Required skills normally acquired through attainment of secondary school graduation, or equivalent. Job duties require the ability to apply advanced reading, writing and arithmetic skills. Bus Driver; Clerk General B, C; Data Entry Operator A, B; Secretary A; Switchboard Operator 4. Required skills normally acquired through attainment of secondary school graduation and completion of additional job related training courses, or one year Community College certificate, or equivalent. Job duties require the ability to apply specialized skills. Clerk General D; Secretary B, C; Stationary Engineer A; Microcomputer Operator A, B The PDF prepared by the employer states that what is required is a: "Grade 12 diploma and completion of additional job related training courses such as computerized 8 Point of Sale system. Knowledge of computers". The PDF proposed by the union contains the entry: "Grade 12 diploma and completion of additional job related training courses, or a one year Community College diploma, or equivalent." Mr. Smith testified that the Booklog system used in the clothing store was introduced at the College four years ago. He said that its application in the book store is more involved than in the clothing store where it functions primarily as a point of sale process. He said that when the system was first introduced he sent four people, not including the grievor, to Chicago for training. He said that the other staff, including the grievor, received four hours of training on each of two separate days. The grievor referred in her evidence to having received two days of training on the Booklog system. The spokesperson for the employer asked Mr. Smith if the training received by the grievor had been the equivalent of a one year community college certificate. He replied that it was not, adding that such a certificate requires 600 to 700 hours of training. Apart from being trained on the point of sale system it appears that the only relevant educational programs the grievor attended were held in conjunction with two day trade shows for college clothing stores. The grievor said that she attended such a program about every second year. She indicated that the programs had included business math and merchandising. Mr. Smith described the programs as professional development courses and not a requirement of the grievor's job. He said that whenever he sees something interesting he sends someone to the program. The grievor did not refer to the length of the programs offered in conjunction with the trade shows but noted that she and Ms. Pineo would go through the display booths and there had been sessions where people from the clothing stores got together and talked about issues and suppliers. This suggests that the educational programs were not the primary focus of the two day programs. When giving his evidence Mr. Smith contended that the grievor is not required to apply specialized skills. In response to a subsequent question from the spokesperson for the union he said that the skill required in the clothing store is to ensure that displays are well presented to customers. The grievor contended that specialized skills are required for her position. When asked what these specialized skills are she replied that it is more of a talent, making something look inviting, marketing it and getting it out there. In the union's brief the grievor described a level 4 rating as appropriate for her position based on designing seasonal displays, on-going in-store merchandising, purchasing items for use in displays "and applying specialized skills to bring plan to fruition." She also referred to in-house Booklog training sessions and her frequent use of email. 9 In her final submissions the spokesperson for the union relied on the reference in the employer's PDF to a grade 12 education and additional job related training courses. The spokesperson for the employer contended that the grievor's job duties require reading and arithmetic skills and there is no evidence that any of her duties require the ability to apply specialized skills. She differentiated the grievor's training from 600 to 700 hours of instruction required for a one year College certificate. She noted that one of the illustrative classifications for a level 4 rating is a Stationary Engineer. The criteria for a level 4 rating refers to skills normally acquired through secondary school graduation and completion of additional job related training courses as an alternative to skills normally acquired through a one year community college certificate. Accordingly, the fact that additional job related training courses are different from or of shorter duration that the training required for a community college certificate is not determinative. Nevertheless the reference to a college certificate suggests that the alternative of job related courses relates to courses of some substance. The grievor's job related training took the form of two-four hour periods of training on the Booklog point of sale system and presumably some training on the previously used system. She also attended short programs held in conjunction with college clothing store trade shows. The total amount of time involved appears to have been fairly minimal. Further, it appears that all of this training occurred after the grievor was hired, meaning that she did not have this training when she commenced working in her position. Another consideration is that the job evaluation manual states that this factor is not to be confused with the educational qualifications of a particular incumbent. Related to this is the fact that the level definitions do not measure education in an absolute sense but rather skills normally acquired through the attainment of certain education levels. As noted above, the grievor testified that doing displays was something she had to learn and indicated that she had examined the advertisements of other retailers to get ideas. The planning and preparation of displays is a form of merchandising that presumably is also taught in courses other than programs offered in conjunction with trade shows. The ability of someone to prepare displays at a high level of competence can be viewed as a specialized skill as can the operation of a computerized point of sale system As the spokesperson for the employer pointed out the job evaluation manual states that a college is to determine the qualification and skill level to perform a job. Provided the qualifications set by the employer for a position are reasonable it is not open to an arbitrator to decide that they should have been set at a higher or lower level. In the instant case it would have been open for the employer in its PDF to specify only skills normally acquired through attainment of secondary school graduation or equivalent. It did not, however, do so. In the PDF the employer stated that the grievor's position 10 requires not only a Grade 12 diploma but also "completion of additional job related training courses". This tracks the language of the type of skills required for a level 4 rating. Given the wording of the PDF I find a level 4 rating to be appropriate. EXPERIENCE The job evaluation manual states that the factor of experience is designed to measure the amount of practical experience in any related work that is necessary to fulfill the requirements of a position. The employer rated this factor at level 2, which is worth 20 points. The union claims that the correct rating is level 3, which is worth 32 points. The relevant factor level definitions as well as the illustrative classification read as follows: 2 More than six months and up to one year of practical expenence. Clerk General B; Computer Operator A; Typist/Steno A, B 3. More than one year and up to three years of practical expenence. Caretaker B; Clerk General C; Library Technician B; Support Services Officer A, B The employer's PDF calls for up to one year of experience in retail sales. The PDF proposed by the union calls for more than one year and up to three years of retail sales experience. The grievor indicated that when she started working for the employer she had two months of retail experience but over the years she came to learn about the need to keep things simple and not overcrowded, the need to focus on the front of the store to draw people in and the need to keep stock moving and keep it looking fresh. In the union's brief the grievor contended that at least three years of experience is required to do all aspects of her job, including doing displays and presentations, the rotation of stock and in-store marketing to students. Mr. Smith contended that less then one year's experience in a retail environment is required since as long as the incumbent knows the point of sale process the rest can be learnt on the job. As with the factor of training and technical skills it is up to the employer to set the minimum level of experience required for a position provided the level it sets is a reasonable one. The level of experience set out in the employer's PDF reflects the 11 factor level that it is arguing for, namely level 2. It is apparent that the grievor's experience enables her to perform her job at a high level. This factor, however, is logically meant to measure the minimum amount of experience required by someone starting out in the position. In light of the evidence as well as the nature of the training/technical skills required by the employer I cannot say that a requirement of more than six months and up to one year of practical experience is unreasonable. Accordingly, I confirm the level 2 rating given by the employer. COMPLEXITY The job evaluation manual states that this factor measures the amount and nature of analysis, problem solving and reasoning required to perform job-related duties. It measures the conceptual demands of a job as characterized by the analysis and interpretation required for problem and solution definition, as well as creativity, mental challenge, degree of job structure, planning activities and the variety and difficulty of tasks. The employer rated the grievor's position at level 3, which is worth 41 points. The union argued for a level 4 rating worth 58 points. The criteria for these level ratings as well as the associated illustrative classifications are as follows: 3. Job duties require the performance of various routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. Clerk General C; General Maintenance Worker; Secretary A 4. Job duties require the performance of varied, non-routine, complex tasks involving different and unrelated processes and/or methods. Clerk General D; Library Technician B; Programmer A, B From the wording of the level definitions it is apparent that both a level 3 and a level 4 rating are appropriate for a range of complex tasks that require different and unrelated processes and/or methods. The key difference between them is whether the complex tasks are better described as routine or non-routine. The grievor described giving refunds as very non-routine in that each student has a different story. She said that "we" try to err on the side of being lenient but within reason. She also noted that with different program start times she has to draw out from 12 students what courses they are taking and when they started. She added that if there is a real problem she refers it to the text book buyer or if she is not available to Mr. Smith. The grievor contended that dealing with school rings is a complex process given all the variables involved. She said that between the three ring companies students can choose from between 80 and 100 options. She indicated that if there is a problem with a finished ring that can easily be fixed, such as a wrong engraving, she calls the ring company but for more serious issues she forwards the ring to Ms. Pineo to have it reordered. She also said that Ms. Pineo ascertains whether an error was made at the clothing store or by the ring company. Mr. Smith contended that the grievor's duties are routine. He noted that Christmas and other special dates come every year. He said that complexity comes from keeping displays fresh and well stocked. He also said that a set process is used when selling nngs. There is no obvious dividing line between complex tasks that are routine and complex tasks that are non-routine. Some assistance can be gained from the fact that a Clerk General C is an illustrative classification for a level 3 rating. This suggests that the typical duties of that position are routine. The applicable guide charts list some of the typical duties of this position as preparing payroll documentation, bank deposits and cash receipt journals; expediting purchase orders and verifying invoices; as well as completing and analyzing documents relating to student admission and registration. A Clerk General D is an illustrative classification for level 4 rating, suggesting that the typical duties of that classification are non-routine. The typical duties of a Clerk General D appear to be somewhat wider in scope than those of a Clerk General C such as determining student financial assistance and eligibility and verifying the completeness and accuracy of produced payroll. Some typical duties of a Clerk General D involve irregular or infrequent activities that might in turn result in a change in the way of doing things. These include "conducts cost analysis studies"; "organizes systems, procedures and paper flow" and "analyzes problems relating to clerical systems and procedures and recommends revisions." Issues addressed by the grievor differ in detail but generally appear to be relatively narrow in scope. There is nothing to suggest that she engages in infrequent activities or ones aimed at potential changes to existing methods. Having regard to these considerations I conclude that the grievor's duties can best be described as routine, complex tasks. As such this factor warrants a level 3 rating. 13 JUDGEMENT This factor measures the independent judgement and problem solving required on the job. It assesses the difficulty in identifying various alternate 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 employer rated the grievor's position at level 2, which is worth 30 points. The union argues for a level 4 rating worth 66 points. The applicable level definitions and illustrative classifications for these as well as for the intervening level 3 rating worth 48 points are as follows: 2. Job duties require some judgement or choice of action within limits. Some analysis is involved in problem-solving. Clerk General B; Clerk Supply B, C; Technician A 3. Job duties require some moderate degree of judgement. Problem solving involves the identification and breakdown of the facts and components of the problem situation. Clerk General C; Secretary A, B; Security Guard 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. ECE Worker; Nurse; Secretary C Both the employer's PDF and the PDF proposed by the union refer to the grievor's role in handling refund requests, including assessing damaged goods. At the hearing the grievor testified that if a student seeks to return a book within a day or two after the three week return period she will normally allow it, although if unsold books have already been sent back to the supplier she is "supposed to" charge a shipping fee. She also noted that there is a $5.00 re-wrap fee that she does not always charge. The grievor contended that she uses analytical techniques when addressing refund requests in that she is required to analyze what people are telling her and decide if they have a legitimate claim. 14 The grievor testified that she uses analytical techniques when analyzing what products are not selling and what to do with them. She said that her first response is to move the item to the front of the store and match it with other items. She added that some items that do not look good on a rack will sell better when displayed. The grievor also said that with seasonal displays she must do an analysis and charge the display from what it was the year before. Mr. Smith in his evidence said that the grievor does some analysis in terms of what is selling in the store. The grievor's duties require some level of analysis. This, however, fits the criteria for levels 2, 3 and 4. It is not apparent that the grievor actually employs analytical techniques when addressing problems, which is a requirement for a level 4 rating. Further, the level of judgement that she exercises is of a very different nature from the judgement associated with the three illustrative classifications for a level 4 rating. The type of judgement exercised by the grievor might be described as involving a choice of action within limits, which meets the criteria for a level 2 rating. It can also, however, be described breaking down the facts and components of a problem situation, which meets the criteria for a level 3 rating. Some assistance in deciding between these two levels can be gained from the fact that Clerk General Band C are illustrative classifications for the two levels. Some of the typical duties of a Clerk General C at level 3 are set out above. The typical duties of a Clerk General B at level 2 include: "Responds to routine enquiries and disseminates general information. Process standard information forms. Performs basic mathematical calculations and verifies totals. Records entries, account numbers and statistical data." These duties appear to be narrower in scope and involve a more restrictive range in which to exercise judgement than is the case with the grievor's duties. In light of this difference I conclude that a level 3 rating for judgement is the most appropriate. MOTOR SKILLS This factor measures the fine motor movements necessary to fulfill the requirements of a position. It considers dexterity, complexity, co-ordination and speed. The employer rated this factor at level C-3, which is worth 25 points. The union rated it at level D-3 worth 37 points. A level 3 rating reflects a prevalence of this type of fine motor movement 31 to 60% of the time. A level C and D rating describe the following types of motor skills: 15 C. Complex fine motor movement involving considerable dexterity, co-ordination and precision is required. Speed is a secondary consideration. C-3 Clerk General C; Programmer A, B; SSO A D. Complex fine motor movement involving significant dexterity, co-ordination and precision is required. Speed is a major consideration. D-3 Secretary A, B The employer's PDF indicates that the grievor uses fine motor movements when using a cash register, a point of sales computer, a calculator, a bank debit/credit machine and a computer. In her evidence the grievor said that whenever possible she will scan items instead of manually entering information. In the union's brief the grievor contended that in addition to the functions listed in the employer's PDF she also uses fine motor movements when on the telephone, stocking shelves and maintaining a storage area. While the performance of the latter two duties does involve physical movement none of the three duties appear to involve fine motor movement. Both a C and a D rating relate to complex fine motor movement involving dexterity, coordination and precision. The key difference is whether speed is a major consideration. The grievor testified that speed is required, particularly when she is the only one working in the clothing store and it gets busy. She said that if she is showing rings to people she will "bounce" between them and the line of people waiting to pay due to a concern that a potential customer might put down an item and leave the store. Mr. Smith acknowledged that when a number of customers are in the store it is difficult for the grievor to serve them all. In terms of the point of purchase process, however, he noted that the grievor has the ability to scan items. He also said that while speed is important it is necessary to ensure that "we" are accurate. The key issue respecting this factor is not whether speed is required of the grievor when handling the full range of her duties or when she is moving between different tasks but rather whether speed is a major consideration when performing fine motor movements. Secretary A and B are the two illustrative classifications for a level D rating. This presumably reflects the amount of time they are involved in keyboarding when preparing large volumes of letters and documents. The grievor's duties do not appear to involve similar extensive fine motor movement. Rather, it appears that during the time when the grievor is actually inputting information into the point of sale system 16 and using the debit or credit card machine speed is a secondary consideration behind the need for accuracy. Having regard to the above considerations I confirm the level C-3 rating assigned by the employer. PHYSICAL DEMAND This factor measures the demand on physical energy required to complete tasks. The employer rated this factor at level 2 worth 16 points. The union argues for a level 3 rating worth 28 points. The criteria and illustrative classifications for these two levels are as follows: 2. Job duties require some physical demand. There is an occasional requirement for repetition and/or speed. Employee usually has comfortable bodily positions with flexibility of movement. Employee uses recurring light physical effort, OR occasional moderate physical effort. Bus Driver; Secretary A, B, C; Security Guard; Clerk General B, C, D; Programmer A, B, C 3. Job duties require regular physical demand. There is a regular need for speed and repetitive use of muscles. Employee is in uncomfortable or awkward bodily positions for short periods of time with some flexibility of movement. Employee uses continuous light physical effort, OR recurring periods of moderate physical effort, OR occasional periods of heavy physical effort. Caretaker A, B; ECE Worker; Switchboard Operator; Technologist A, B; Clerk General A 17 The job evaluation manual refers to physical demand over the course of "part" of a day as occasional "most" of the day as recurring and "all the time" as continuous. The employer's PDF refers to the grievor as standing and walking 90% of the time, lifting 14% of the time, engaging in effort when using cash register/computer/point of sale equipment 75% of the time and climbing for stock maintenance 2% of the time. The grievor testified that when doing receiving she lifts large boxes of clothing, which might weigh 30 pounds. She said that three or four boxes could arrive in a day and then none arrive for three or four days. Mr. Smith estimated that boxes of clothing arrive an average of twice a week. The grievor indicated that she uses a step stool when stocking shelves and dressing mannequins. Mr. Smith noted that the grievor has been provided with an ergonomically correct stool to use in addition to a stress mat behind the counter. He also said that when customers are in the store the grievor is probably on her feet. The grievor testified that she stands most of the time, including when she is at the counter which is quite wide. In her final submissions the spokesperson for the employer submitted that although the grievor does a lot of standing, walking and some lifting these are not to the same extent as with a Caretaker or Early Childhood Education Worker, both of which are illustrative classifications for a level 3 rating. I note, however, that a Clerk General A is also an illustrative classification for this level and among the typical duties of someone in this classification are delivering mail and materials and maintaining and delivering various supplies. The grievor's role in lifting boxes of clothing is a form of moderate physical effort which would typically take up a small part of her day or none at all on some days. This task can be viewed as involving occasional moderate physical effort, which by itself would justify a level 2 rating. The real issue relates to the extent of the light physical effort on the part of the grievor, including standing, walking and climbing on a step stool. The grievor's use of a step stool to stock shelves and dress mannequins would likely involve uncomfortable or awkward bodily positions for short periods of time. Some physical effort is also required when the grievor operates the point of sale process which entails the repetitive use of muscles. When all of these considerations are taken into account I believe that although the grievor's physical duties primarily involve light physical effort they can best be described as continuous rather than occasional or recurring. Continuous light physical effort justifies a level 3 rating. Accordingly I find a level 3 rating to be appropriate. 18 STRAIN FROM WORK PRESSURES/DEMANDS/DEADLINES This factor measures the strain associated with, or caused by, frequency and predictability of deadlines, interruptions, distractions and/or workloads, multiple and/or conflicting demands and/or dealing with people in difficult situations. The employer rated this factor at level 2 worth 16 points. The union argues in favour of a level 3 rating worth 28 points. The relevant level definitions and illustrative classifications are as follows: 2 Job duties involve some work pressures. Interruptions and pressing deadlines tend to be predictable. Tight, changing deadlines and conflicting demands occur occasionally. Clerk General A, B; Library Technician A, B; Technologist A 3. Job duties involve moderate work pressures or demands. Interruptions, changing deadlines, multiple demands occur regularly but are usually predictable. Occasionally, critical deadlines may occur. Clerk General C, D; Secretary A, B; SSO A, B The employer and the union agree that the grievor is frequently interrupted when performing her duties. This relates to customers asking her questions about products and services while she is helping other customers, accepting payments or arranging displays. The grievor also answers phone calls from people asking questions about whether the store has particular items or sizes. Because the store is located near an entry door people also come in seeking directions. In addition, the grievor is required to keep an eye out for possible theft. The union spokesperson and the grievor contended that interruptions are unpredictable. The evidence, however, suggests that interruptions are predictable in the sense that they occur frequently and generally relate to the same types of predictable Issues. The grievor testified that she faces deadlines in connection with uniforms required for certain courses. She noted that a student cannot go to cooking class in street clothes. She said that students come to her when uniforms have not come in or when their size has been sold out. Earlier in her evidence, when addressing the factor of complexity, the grievor said that when a required product is not available she must find out from the buyer when it is expected. The grievor described graduation as a deadline because 19 parents come into the store and buy impulsive items such as photo frames, mugs, pens and shirts. Mr. Smith contended that the only real deadlines faced by the grievor are opening the store at the start of the day and closing it at the end of the day. He said that it is up to the buyer to ensure that uniforms and other products are in on time. It is apparent from the evidence that the grievor is impacted by deadlines, such as having to deal with students when uniforms are not available. She does not, however, face changing deadlines or critical deadlines in terms of her having to perform specific tasks by a set deadline. While a level 2 and a level 3 rating both contemplate predictable interruptions, the criteria for a level 3 rating refer to interruptions which occur regularly, which describes the grievor's situation. The criteria for a level 3 rating, however, also refer to regularly changing deadlines, which does not describe the grievor's job duties. Even the reference in the criteria for a level 2 rating to pressing deadlines overstates the situation with respect to the grievor's duties. This is one of those situations where neither of the level definitions advanced by the parties accurately describes the grievor's duties. On balance, however I believe a level 2 rating more appropriately captures the situation facing the grievor. Accordingly, I confirm the level 2 rating given by the employer. INDEPENDENT ACTION This factor measures the independence of action and decisions required by a job. The job evaluation manual notes that controls can be in the form of supervision, policies, procedures or established practices. The employer contends that a level 3 rating worth 33 points is appropriate. The union argues that a level 4 rating worth 46 points should be awarded. The level definitions and illustrative classifications for these ratings are as follows: 3. Job duties are performed in accordance with general procedures and past practices under periodic supervision, with occasional periods of supervisor input or verification. There is moderate freedom to act independently. Clerk General C, D; General Maintenance Worker; Microcomputer Operator B; Secretary A, B 20 4. Job duties are performed in accordance with procedures and past practices which may be adapted and modified to meet particular situations and/or problems. There is considerable freedom to act independently with Supervisor input or verification when requested. Library Technician B; Secretary C; SSO A, B; Technician C; Technologist B It is clear from the evidence and the parties' PDFs that no one directly supervises the grievor's work. Mr. Smith testified that his office is behind the clothing store and he walks through the store one to three times per day. He also said that about once a week he asks the grievor if she has any problems or concerns. As noted above, the grievor is the one who designs displays. She generally decides what will be displayed although she will also implement proposals made by Ms. Pineo. The grievor has some flexibility with respect to granting refunds but raises questionable requests with others. She said that if a customer is a couple of days late she will give them a refund but should a matter involve something beyond what she is willing to go out on a limb for she will refer the student to Ms. Gavin or Ms. Chipps Drummond. As noted above, at another point in her evidence the grievor said that if there is a real problem she will refer it to the text book buyer or if she is not available to Mr. Smith. The grievor testified that should she have any difficulties with the part-time employees she will raise the matter with Ms. Chipps Drummond. The grievor testified that there are some matters she raises with Mr. Smith. In this regard she said that she will ask him for a budget for purchases for displays and she directs unruly or threatening customers to him. When giving his evidence Mr. Smith indicated that the grievor seldom raises issues with him but when she does they generally involve complaints from customers that have not been resolved. The criteria for a level 4 rating refers to procedures and past practices which might be adapted and modified to meet particular situations or problems. In the union's brief the grievor stated that this does occur. When asked about this at the hearing the grievor gave the examples of "a cute item" not selling at Christmas or certain styles of clothing not selling and her advising Ms. Pineo of this. I do not view this type of action as involving the adaptation or modification of procedures or a past practice. The criteria for both a level 3 and a level 4 rating cover situations where an employee generally works without supervision and follows established procedures and past practices. A major difference is that a level 3 rating involves periodic supervision and occasional periods of supervisor input or verification whereas with a level 4 rating 21 an employee can request supervisor input or verification. In the instant case Mr. Smith asks the grievor about once a week if she has any problems or concerns. Further, with respect to a key area where she has discretion, namely when giving refunds, the grievor's evidence indicates that beyond situations such as a student being late she raises questionable refund requests and unruly customers with either a more senior bargaining unit staff member or with Mr. Smith. In my view the situation does not meet the criteria for a level 4 rating. Accordingly I confirm the level 3 rating assigned but the employer. RESPONSIBILITY FOR DECISIONS AND ACTIONS 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 employer rated this factor at level 2 worth 26 points. The union contends that a level 3 rating worth 44 points is more appropriate. The criteria and illustrative classifications for these ratings are as follows: 2. Decisions and/or actions have limited impact on the organization. Errors are detected easily and quickly and may result only in minor embarrassment, confusion, or expense for correction. Clerk General A, B; Driver; Food Service Worker B, C 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 or resources. Clerk General C, D; General Maintenance Worker; Reproduction Equipment Operator B, C; Secretary B, C The evidence indicates that a reconciliation of cash and sales documents is performed by someone other than the grievor. The grievor testified that a possible error in the store could involve the scanner system "bouncing" to a different product, which in turn would make the inventory count wrong and result in either over or undercharging for a product. She also referred to the possibility of her transposing a 22 number when entering information or her making a mistake on a ring order which might necessitate having the ring remade. In her final submissions the spokesperson for the union referred to the possibility that the grievor might make an error with respect to a refund. In addition she contended that the grievor might fail to restock a fast moving item or provide information about such an item to the buyer. It is possible that for a time the grievor might fail to restock an item from the storage area. There was, however, no evidence that the grievor is held responsible for the availability of sufficient items in the store. Presumably Ms. Pineo as the buyer has access to recent sales figures. Mr. Smith contended that the impact of an error on the part of the grievor would at most involve her selling an item at less than cost, which would not be a big issue, although it does go to the need for accuracy. In the union's brief the grievor contended that there would be a considerable impact should refunds and day-to-day transactions not be accurate. It is apparent that frequent errors on the part of the grievor might have a considerable impact on the financial operation of the bookstore. The logical approach, however, is not to assume that an incumbent is unsuitable for their position and will make a lot of errors but to instead to address the potential impact of an individual error. Anyone error on the part of the grievor would likely result in minor embarrassment. It would not disrupt workflow or result in a duplication of effort other than perhaps a need to correct inventory numbers. There could be some financial loss but in context the amount would be relatively minimal. Given these considerations I conclude that the criteria for a level 2 rating more accurately describes the grievor's situation. WORK ENVIRONMENT The job evaluation manual states that this factor measures working conditions in terms of the physical environment while doing work. The employer gave the grievor's position a level 1 rating worth 10 points. The union contends that a level 2 rating worth 32 points is appropriate. The relevant level definitions and illustrative classifications are set out below. The job evaluation manual refers to three levels of disagreeable and/or hazardous elements, namely "slightly", "moderately" and "extremely". 1. Job duties are carried out with occasional exposure to slightly disagreeable and/or hazardous elements. Clerk General B, C, D; Secretary A, B, C 23 2. Job duties are carried out with occasional exposure to moderately disagreeable and/or hazardous elements OR recurring exposure to slightly disagreeable and/or hazardous elements OR there is a requirement for occasional travel (10% - 30%). SSO C; Switchboard Operator; Technician A, B, C; Technologist A, B, C The grievor described noise as a disagreeable aspect of her work environment. She testified that the store is in a noisy area with a lot of traffic and with a Tim Horton's nearby. She said that in the week prior to the hearing students were in the area selling tickets and the radio station was raising money for AIDS. She also referred to a health fair that had been held outside the store. Mr. Smith contended that while the store is located by a busy hallway it is not overly noisy. He said that on rare occasions the radio station will play music but it is within what he described as appropriate decibels. He noted that student activities are at times held in the hallway. When discussing this factor in the union's brief the grievor referred to customers who are upset and angry over being unable to obtain a refund. At the hearing she mentioned unpleasant and threatening customers. Mr. Smith said that he is consulted about abusive customers and there have not been many of them. He also indicated that while he is in his office he keeps the door open a bit so that he can hear any difficulties. I do not view normal noise levels generated by students as consulting a disagreeable element in the context of an educational institution. At times there will be more noise than usual outside the store due to organized activities or music from the radio station. This appears to occur on an occasional basis and can be categorized as a slightly disagreeable element. At times students can be disagreeable when denied a refund. It appears, however, that abusive customers are referred to others to address. I view these situations as involving occasional exposure on the part of the grievor to slightly disagreeable or hazardous elements. Having regard to the considerations I confirm the level 1 rating assigned to the employer. CONCLUSION The various ratings assigned by the employer resulted in the grievor's position receiving a total of 349 points. An additional 19 points resulting from a level 4 rating for the factor of training/technical skills, 18 more points for a level 3 rating for 24 judgement and l2 more points for a level 3 rating for physical demand raise the total to 398 points. This is within the range for payband 6. It is apparent that the grievor's position is "atypical" in that her duties do not match the typical duties for any of the Clerk General classifications. Payband 6 is, however, the payband for a Clerk General C. In the circumstances I find that the grievor's position should have been rated as a Clerk General C at payband 6. I retain jurisdiction to address any issues that might directly arise out of this decision which the parties are unable to resolve. Dated this 12th day of January 2007. Arbitrator