Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGagne 17-12-21IN THE MATTER OF AN EXPEDITED CLASSIFICATION ARBITRATION BETWEEN: ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION, Local 109 (FOR SUPPORT STAFF) (hereinafter called the "Union") -and- COLLEGE EMPLOYER COUNCIL (FOR COLLEGES OF APPLIED ARTS and TECHNOLOGY) In the form of FANSHAWE COLLEGE (hereinafter called the "College") -and- GRIEVANCE of YVAN GAGNE OPSEU File No. 2017-0109-0003 (hereinafter the "Grievor or the Incumbent") ARBITRATOR: REPRESENTING THE COLLEGE: REPRESENTING THE UNION Richard H. McLaren, C.Arb. Julie McQuire, Employee Relations Consultant Joel Van Bynen, Lab Operations Manager, Faculty of Technology Colleen Maloney -Nettleton, Human Resources Specialist Ron Kelly — Classification Steward Local 109 Dana Copeland — Local 109 Yvan Gagne — Grievor A HEARING IN RELATION TO THIS MATTER WAS HELD AT LONDON, ONTARIO ON 13 December 2017. AWARD The Grievor, Yvan Gagne, is employed by the College in a "Technical Support" position at the Norton Wolf School of Aviation Technology, Faculty of Technology. The Grievor would like his job title to be amended and recorded as "Technologist". Mr. Gagne feels his position deals with far more than assisting others with technical difficulties. Email communications and memos would appear to refer to Mr. Gagne as a Technologist, yet the College does not formally recognize that title in reference to the Incumbent. While I listened to this request at the hearing I cannot grant it. The titling of positions is within the "Management Rights" clause of the Collective Agreement and a classification arbitrator does not have the jurisdiction or standing to make such a change. The College and the Union were not initially in agreement with respect to the Position Description Form ("PDF"). As a result of the grievance procedure a revised proposed PDF was presented by the College. The Grievor signed the revised PDF on 30 June 2016 and the College signed subsequently. The Grievor remains of the opinion that some tasks or duties which he performs are not addressed adequately in the PDF or the descriptions are unsatisfactory. Nevertheless, other than the issue of the title to the position these lingering issues were not addressed in much significant detail during the hearing. To the extent that it is necessary these lingering points are addressed in this Award. There is a continuing disagreement on the point scoring for the position as reflected in the revised PDF. There are five (5) factors under the Job Evaluation Manual (the "Manual") in dispute. The College evaluated the position and rated it at 548 points, placing the position within Payband H. The Grievor and the Union submit that the position ought to be evaluated at 687 points placing it in the higher rated Payband J. As a result of several meetings held with the Grievor a revised PDF was presented and executed on 30 June 2016. While certain changes were made to the PDF the rating did not change. The Grievor seeks to have his position reclassified to a higher payband and to have his job title amended to "Technologist". This last point having been dealt with above. 4 Following this decision, should there be any change in the Payband (including benefits, seniority and bumping rights); the same will be retroactive to 28 March 2016, being the date of the Grievance. The Position and Duties The Incumbent provides technical support and assistance within the lab for the implementation of aviation related programs for staff and students. Approximately 42% of the time performing the work involves servicing and repairing Avionics equipment and recording maintenance and repair activities for aircraft/equipment. There is a very important safety of air travel aspect to this recording function. The avionics program falls under Transport Canada Regulations and all equipment must be maintained to those standards. In summary of this aspect of the position the Incumbent is required to do servicing and repairs in order to ensure the lab is at all times ready for use by staff and students. The other dominant function taking approximately 25% of the Incumbent's time involves assisting Professors by demonstrating equipment and processes when requested; providing instructional aides to demonstrate techniques taught by the Professors; and monitoring students in the labs for safety purposes. The position within the Norton Wolf School of Aviation Technology supports aviation related programming with a primary focus on avionics. In performing these functions the Incumbent must be mindful that the role is to support learning and development but they do not teach the students, that being the function of the Professors. The Incumbent assists the student in acquiring the applied skill arising out of an understanding and use of the theory they are taught by Professors. A further 15% of the work is performing preventative maintenance; maintaining a suitable preventative maintenance program for equipment other than Avionics. The Incumbent is required to maintain M.S.D.S. standards for assigned labs. The remaining aspects of the position involve ordering supplies, preparing materials for related classes and other duties as assigned. 3 Factors in Dispute Each of the five factors in dispute is dealt with below under separate headings. 3. Analysis and Problem Solving: Ratings: College Level 3 / Union Level 4 This factor measures the level of complexity involved in analyzing situations, information or problems of varying levels of difficulty; and in developing options, solutions or other actions. (i) The Union The Incumbent submits that "most maintenance that I do is intense". He further states he is required to analyze complex problems affecting equipment and its proper functioning. As one example of his analysis and problem solving skills, Mr. Gagne outlines not only the problem, but his solution to the laser wire marker printing issue. The Grievor would appear to be proficient at troubleshooting and is adept at thinking outside the box. He fabricated a harness that ultimately led to resolving the problem. He could establish that the flow switch was at fault. After spending a few hours with the supplier's field service technician (who incidentally had to engage the assistance of an engineer in California by phone to talk him through the procedures) the Grievor quickly grasped a thorough understanding of the machine. Since then the College has relied on the Grievor's skills and there has been no return visits from outside technicians; he had acquired the necessary understanding. (ii) The College The College submits that regular and recurring examples identified in the PDF represent the normal problems faced in this role and the analysis to easily identify such problems and recognizing when additional information is required. The College submits that if an issue or problem cannot be resolved in a timely manner the role has resources to assist: including diagnostic equipment; equipment manuals, colleagues or ultimately resorting to the acquisition of a new part or sending a part(s) out for repair. The College wholly believes the factor is appropriately rated at Level 3. M (iii) Findings The essential difference between Level 3 and Level 4 is the degree to which problems can be identified. Level 3 involves working on identifiable problems whereas Level 4 involves working on problems that are not readily identifiable. Both levels provide for further inquiry, which at Level 4 may include investigation and research. I find that the position involves problems of Level 3 being "identifiable" and of Level 4 being "not readily identifiable". It is difficult to determine the precise mix of the two different degrees of identification of a problem. For example, equipment that has been red tagged as being inoperative may involve an identifiable problem. However, because of the fact that the Incumbent is dealing with aviation equipment a great deal of the time a full range of diagnostic tests must be conducted to ascertain any related problems to whatever is described on the red tag. That testing can be a routine inquiry to determine the problem but can also be one of further investigation and research. The equipment is frequently misused or abused by students and that makes many of the problems non -routine in identifying what to do to fix them. I am satisfied by the evidence the Union provided that there is a significant amount of work on problem solving which is not readily identifiable. It was described to me that from time to time there is a necessity to go to outside sources, in addition to manufactures schematic diagrams and other information, for trouble shooting. In carrying out these activities there must be rigorous adherence to Transport Canada and M.S.D.S. standards. In some cases the problem may be non -identifiable and a similar piece of working equipment must be used to do a comparison check against the malfunctioning equipment in order to determine what the problem may be. This must be considered as Level 4 work in that it is a problem which is not readily identifiable and requires research and investigation to solve. The maintenance and repair functions of the two types of equipment, being avionics and non -avionics equipment, amounts to 67% of the job activity. Therefore, I find that the Union has established that the position requires on a regular and recurring basis analysis and problem solving skills at Level 4. The 5 Union has established its case on the factor. Therefore, it is ordered that the regular and recurring rating be at Level 4 which is 110 points. 5. Guiding/Advising Others: Ratings: College Level 3, Union Level 4 This factor refers to any assigned responsibility to guide or advise others (e.g. other employees, students, clients) in the area of the position's expertise. This is over and above communicating with others in that the position's actions directly help others in the performance of their work or skill development. (i) The Union This is one area of the PDF where the Grievor disputes the fact that the original PDF does not cover the fact of the Incumbents ongoing involvement. Some examples were deleted in the revised PDF. The Union and the Grievor submit that there is a constant ongoing involvement in the development of the students' skills as per the trade requirements. Each year the Incumbent is also involved in assisting new faculty to refresh, revise or develop their skills on the particular equipment the College has in its lab. (ii) The College The College submits the while the position may advise students by recommending or providing knowledgeable direction regarding a decision or course of action, ensuring they are adhering to safety and industry requirements in the lab, the position is not responsible for the students' ongoing learning and skill development. The College asserts the factor is correctly rated at Level 3. (iii) Findings The Union submission focusses on the phrase in Level 4 of "ongoing involvement in their progress". There is no doubt that the student progresses in their skill development moving from one level of understanding to a higher level. The Incumbent assists the student in their ongoing progress in developing and acquiring skills, some of which build upon prior skills. The example being given is, of first learning to solder a piece of wiring and then to learn how to do it lying on one's back and doing it over your head. This illustrates development of the skill but the ongoing involvement in their progress suggests responsibility for development and that is an ongoing teaching function of the Professor, tied to evaluation of the 2 progress. The Incumbent has no teaching or evaluation function. The position does require ongoing reinforcement of the learning that has gone on and is the subject matter of the Professor's teaching. I find that without more of a teaching function than the pure skills development there is a better fit at Level 3 as rated by the College. As the definition of Advise states the Incumbent "has the authority to recommend, or provide knowledgeable direction regarding a course of action, {being the acquired skill development}. I find that the Union has not established that the position requires Guiding and Advising at Level 4. There is no change in the factor established by the Union's case. 6. Independence of Action: Ratings: College Level 2 / Union Level 3 + 04 This factor measures the level of independence or autonomy in the position. (i) Union The Incumbent submits that his tasks are not predictable, that he always gets interrupted and that only certain maintenance of equipment is on a rotational basis. The Grievor asserts that when equipment is damaged he must determine if it needs immediate repair or can be quarantined and repaired at a later date. The Grievor submits that he is constantly conversing with Professors in order to have necessary supplies and functioning equipment. He also confirmed that he relies on service manuals and industry standards when troubleshooting complex problems and even provided an excerpt from Manual AC 43.13 — Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices — Aircraft Inspection and Repair. It was further submitted that in demonstrating to students how to use equipment and do set up the Incumbent uses operating and service manuals combined with personal knowledge and skill to troubleshoot complex problems. (ii) College The College submits that the objectives of this position are prescribed, repair and maintenance of equipment, must follow established procedures and specific guidelines. Assisting the Professor by demonstrating equipment and processes is confined to the curriculum being taught and the acquisition of supplies and VA equipment is limited by internal checks and controls. The College submits the factor is properly evaluated at Level 2 as there is little autonomy in this position. (iii) Findings The Incumbent has a level of autonomy that appears to fit the Level 3 description. The Professor must teach to the industry standard and the Incumbent applies the standard in all of his demonstration of skills required. I find that the Incumbent is not working occasionally at Level 4. However, the Incumbent does assist in the student acquiring skills by applying guidelines as to how to perform certain skills. Therefore, the Union has established that the appropriate description of the position is at Level 3 but without the occasional Level 4 rating. It is ordered that the Level 3 be applied carrying 78 points. 7. Service Delivery: Ratings: College Level 2 / Union Level 3 This factor looks at the service relationship that is an assigned requirement of the position. It considers the required manner in which the position delivers service to customers and not the incumbent's interpersonal relationship with those customers. All positions have a number of customers, who may be primarily internal or external. The level of service looks at more than the normal anticipation of what customers want and supplying it efficiently. It considers how the request for service is received, for example directly from the customer; through the Supervisor or workgroup or project leader; or by applying guidelines and processes. It then looks at the degree to which the position is required to design and fulfil the service requirement. (i) Union The Grievor stated that because the program is a newer one he is required to build harnesses to test different radios. He emphasized that the College does not have enough equipment or pieces to support the equipment so that all the benches in the lab may be used. : The other aspect of service delivery involves the learning outcomes of the students. It was submitted that the Incumbent has to understand the customer's needs and tailor the work to meet those needs. (i i) College The College has evaluated this factor at Level 2 as the position provides services according to "a best method approach". The faculty states what is required and the Grievor determines how to fulfil the request by selecting the best available option to assist the student in acquiring practical skills. There is limited opportunity to change the options and safety dictates how many activities must be carried out and demonstrated by the Incumbent. The College does not require the Grievor to design, customize or modify the service being delivered. (iii) Findings The examples provided by the Union do not establish that the Incumbent designs, customizes or modifies the service being delivered. The Incumbent provides service according to specifications and known safety procedures. He selects the best method of delivering the service but does not teach the student the service rather he gives the student the opportunity to practice and acquire skills. I find that the Union has not established a case that the rating of the College is incorrect at a Level 2. Therefore, there is no change in the point rating of this factor. 8. Communication: Ratings: College Level 3 / Union Level 4 This factor measures the communication skills required by the position, both verbal and written and includes: - communication to provide advice, guidance, information or training - interaction to manage necessary transactions - interpersonal skills to obtain and maintain commitment and influence the actions of others (i) Union The Grievor submits that within a lab environment he gives knowledge and authoritative information to students that aids and enhances student's apprenticeship skills. The Incumbent demonstrates a task, monitors the students' performance of said task and then advises them how to correct and/or improve Oj their skills. The Grievor's communication skills are expressed both verbally and visually. (ii) College The College asserts the role of the Technical Support position is not to instruct/train students; however it is required to assist faculty in the demonstration of equipment and processes. The College does not believe the position is required to gain the cooperation of others as having the "skills needed to possibly having to move others to your point of view and gaining commitment to shared goals". The communication factor at Level 3 does incorporate explaining and/or interpreting information to secure understanding and may involve communicating technical information and advice. (iii) Findings The Union has established that the Incumbent both instructs and trains as those words are defined in the definitions. The Incumbent provides authoritative information as to technique and how to execute the technique within the lab setting. The role of the Incumbent is to impart his knowledge and skill at performing functions and does so by demonstrating them within the formal instructional setting of the Lab. Therefore, the Union has satisfied me that the Grievor does work on a regular and recurring basis at Level 4. It is ordered that the points rating be altered to reflect the points at Level 4 of 110. CONCLUSION Following a thorough review and subject to the foregoing reasons, I find that the Union has been successful in establishing changes to 3 factors being: Analysis and Problem Solving at Level 4 (110 points); Independence of Action at Level 3 (78 points) and Communication at Level 4 (110 points). With these three adjustments the total points score is 644. In accordance with the Manual that places the position at Payband J. It is ordered that the College alter the PDF ratings in accordance with this Award. In so doing the Grievor is entitled to a retroactive pay from the 28th of March 2016 to the date of payment in accordance with this Award. The Holiday Season being 10 upon us the College is given three pay periods from the date of this Award to make the retroactive payment to the Grievor. In the event that the parties have a disagreement as to the remedies provided by this Award they can request in writing that the Arbitrator re -open the hearing to make a final determination of what is owed to the Grievor. The Arbitrator reserves the right to make the Grievor whole and determine the amounts to be paid to the Grievor for the next 60 days after which he will no longer have any jurisdiction to re -open the hearing and determine the monies owed to the Grievor. DATED at London, Ontario this 21St day of December, 2017. Richard H. M Laren, C.Arb. Arbitrator 11 Arbitration Data Sheet - Support Staff Classification ' 1[Py�,�A,� G'[�G^�i :j'�� j Urn l�y!`-en College: Fi"" zhuwe � Incumbent: Supervisor Current Payband, Payband Requested by Grievor: 1. Concerning the attached Position Description f=orm: ❑ The parties -agreed on the contents o The Union disagrees with the contents and the specific details are attached. 2. The attached Written Submission Is from: ❑ The Union ❑ The College Factor Signatures; -Management `tTrion.: Arbitrator Regular/ Recurring occasional Regular/ Recurring occasional Regular/ Recurring Occasional Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points 1A. Education �t f % `T 3 / �g 67 18. Education 2. Experience6 3. Analysis and Problem Solving 7� 7 ` / / 4. Planning/Coordinating�- 5. Guiding/Advising Others ,3 f 3 6. Independence of Action b %p •� ZZ I 7. Service Delivery 3 c� 2 I 8, Communication 1/09. Physical Effort 3�- �7 La 10. Audio/Visual.Effort c7/9 020 �-TF �2 6� 11. Working Environment 3 subtotals . (a) `� e� (b) --' (a) b 1 b (b) (a) (0 (b) Total Points (a) + (b) :5-114,' I Resulting Payband ez 7 17- Signatures: ( rievor) M ,aq, 5_1;20/1 A-t4>4&OL-� VZ � (Date) Xollege Representative) (Date) (Union Represe tive) (Date) / �-- rbitra io ignature) (Date of Hearing) (Date of Award)