Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBourdeau 19-12-13IN THE MATTER OF AN EXPEDITED CLASSIFICATION ARBITRATION BETWEEN: ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION,Local 416 (FOR SUPPORT STAFF) (hereinafter called the "Union") -and - COLLEGE EMPLOYERS COUNCIL FOR COLLEGES OF APPLIED ARTS and TECHNOLOGY In the form of ALGONQUIN COLLEGE (hereinafter called the "College") -and - GRIEVANCE OF BEN BOURDEAU OPSEU File No.2019-0416-0004 (hereinafter called the "Grievor"or the "Incumbent") IjII.IUlYAbW1F,_1 iU WI REPRESENTING THE UNION: Richard H.McLaren,C.Arb. Christine Kelsey,President OPSEU 416 Ben Bourdeau,Grievor REPRESENTING THE COLLEGE Brianna Sutton,Labour Relations Specialist Lyle Fishen,ITS Infrastructure Manager Marcus Christian,Classification Specialist A HEARING IN RELATION TO THIS MATTER WAS HELD AT OTTAWA,ONTARIO ON 10 DECEMBER 2019. AWARD 1.Ben Bourdeau is employed by Algonquin College (the "College")as a System Administrator Level 2 within the Infrastructure Services Team ("ITS").He supports the College's computing infrastructure,comprising more than 300 servers located across 3 campuses.He works with and supports all staff,faculty and students. 2.The position of Administrator Level 2 is described in the Position Description Form (the "PDF").The parties agree on the content of the PDF. 3.Mr.Bourdeau (hereafter the "Grievor"or the "Incumbent")disagreed with the point scoring using the Support Staff Job Evaluation Manual (the "Manual")and grieved on 12 March 2019.He claims that he is improperly classified and should be classified at Payband K.A discussion of each of the Factors giving rise to the dispute is set out below. 4.A Step 1 meeting was held on 8 April 2019.The Step 1 response denied the grievance on the basis that no new information was provided that would substantiate a change in the rating of the Factors.A Step 2 meeting was held on 7 May 2019,following which the response was reiterated,nothing had been presented to validate a change in any of the Factors.At which point the matter was scheduled to go to arbitration. 5.The College evaluated the position and rated it at 621 points,placing the position within Payband I.The Grievor and the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (the "Union") submit that the position ought to be evaluated at 723 points,placing it at the higher-rated Payband K. The Duties of the Position 6.The Incumbent provides technical support for the College's computing infrastructure. Succinctly,the position provides guidance in systems management,and technical support 2 for the College's Active Directory and Core Infrastructure Services Reporting to the Manager of the Infrastructure Services Team.The incumbent is responsible for the planning,tailoring,installing,monitoring and maintaining of network operating systems, networking and data communications systems software.The incumbent is also responsible for product research;providing technical advice,training,guidance and direction to support,administrative and academic clients. 7.Server administration and maintenance comprises 40%of the duties and responsibilities. Another 25%of the activities of the position involves work related to the sever configuration,deployment and maintenance.Making up the major balance of the work is the role of server support comprising 15%of the duties.The balance of the duties involves network operational system (NOS)support and configuration along with client support and incident management. Factors in Dispute 8.There are four Factors in dispute in this proceeding:Factor #4 -Planning/Coordinating; Factor #6 -Independence of Action;Factor #10 -Audio/Visual Effort and Factor #11 - Working Environment.Each of these Factors are dealt with under separate headings below. Factor #4 -P1annin/Coordinatin:Ratiuns:College Level 2 /Union Level 3 This factor measures the planning and/or coordinating requirements of the position.This refers to the organizational and/or project management skills required to bring together and integrate activities and resources needed to complete tasks or organize events.There may be a need to perform tasks with overlapping deadlines (multi -tasking)to achieve the decided results. (i)The Union The Union is not submitting that the Greivor changes people's schedules.What is occurring is that the Incumbent selects and adapts methods for many of the work assignments.Once the planning has been done at the overview and policy level the Incumbent picks the day and the time to carry out the work and other employees typically 3 tie into the selected dates.Therefore,the Incumbent is working in a fashion that achieves adaptation to what is required based on the initial selection of the date and times for the window to carry out the work.Managers can be involved to cause adoption of the plan dates.Nevertheless,the reality is that such intervention is rarely required. (ii)The College It was submitted that the PDF examples illustrate that the Incumbent is working within managements'direction regarding software upgrades and installations.There is a committee,the ITS Change Advisory Board which plans the relevant upgrades.Changes and timelines are reviewed with the Technical Team Lead and Manager.Where the upgrade would affect another Department's employees and their schedules,arrangements are made between the respective managers of ITS and the affected department regarding determining the time of the completion of the task.It was submitted that at Level 3 the Manual requires the position to affect the work schedule of other employees and the Incumbent does not do that activity. (iii)Findings The College submissions focus on the management authority and make submissions that encompass more than just the activities of the Grievor.The Manual does not focus on the authority to alter or affect schedules,but the planning and coordinating required in carrying out the duties of the position.I find that to carry out upgrades or bring servers back online the work does of necessity,because it is affecting the operating data systems of the College,has an impact on the deployment of College employees.The Incumbent needs to plan and adapt to minimize disruptions and impacts.There are many moving parts to be taken account of and their interconnectedness means the Incumbent is deciding the order of activities and planning to have the least employees impacted.He does more than merely plan or make arrangements by coordinating calendars of others as is stated in the Notes to Readers at Level 2.I,therefore,find that the Union has established that the Grievor is Planning/Coordinating activities at a Level 3.Therefore,I find that the pointing ought to be adjusted to Level 3. Factor #6.Independence of Action:Ratings:College Level 3 I Union Level 4 This factor measures the level of independence or autonomy in the position.The following elements should be considered:-the types of decisions that the position makes;what aspects of the tasks are decided by the position on its own or what is decided by,or in consultation with, someone else,such as the supervisor;the rules,procedures,past practice and guidelines that are available to provide guidance and direction.[These considerations,when taken as a whole,will define the parameters and constraints of the position within which the incumbent is free to act.] (i)The Union It is submitted that there are no procedures or policies for this position.Virtually everything the Incumbent does is according to industry best practices.The only parameters or constraints that are in place to guide the Grievor's decision making are either "industry practices"reflected in vendor's manuals or department policies. Therefore,it is submitted that the Incumbent has the autonomy to act within these boundaries and would only need to consult with the supervisor on issues that were outside these parameters.There are no documents or procedures to follow when dealing with daily activities of troubleshooting or bringing back online or adapting and installing a computer system. (ii)The College The College submits that the positon is very mechanical and that the Incumbent merely has to select the relevant processes to achieve the end result.It is submitted that there are a range of sources in the form of general guidelines,vendor manuals and procedure guides;together with past practice and system hardware upgrade paths that make the position a Level 2. (iii)Findings The Union has established that the vendor software has to be adapted and configured to fit the framework of the College's computer systems.This is always the case whether the Incumbent is installing a new system;upgrading a system or patching problems.There is no particular guidance documentation or step by step procedure that the Grievor can or must follow.While he may engage in discussions with vendor and College personnel the Union has established that he does indeed work very independently.There is management oversight but it is more collaborative than instructive in nature.The Union has established that the Incumbent has to adjust the vendor software and adapt it to the 5 College system.Little or no guidance on how to do that is available.Experience and trial and error are the vital functions which establish this Factor as at a Level 4 as described in the Manual. Factor #10 -Audio/Visual Effort:Ratings:College Level 2 /Union Level 3 This factor measures the requirement for audio or visual effort.The factor measures the following two aspects. a)the degree of attention or focus required,in particular for: -periods ofshort,repetitious tasks requiring audio/visual focus -periods where task priorities and deadlines change and additional focus and effort is required to achieve the modfIed deadline b)activities over which the position has little or no control that make focus dWIcult.This includes the requirement to swtich attention between types of tasks and sensory input (e.g.Multi-tasking where each task requires concentration). (i)The Union It is submitted that recovering of failed servers can be of significant duration as are Schema upgrade research and implementation,network connectivity troubleshooting (communication between systems,antivirus and patching),as well as dealing with cyber security issues.These types of tasks frequently require more than 2 hours of concentration as required by the definition for Level 3. (ii)The College It is submitted that the duties of the job include responding to tickets and queries from the Service Desk and other employees of the College on a daily basis.Such work would carry with it an expectation that there would be interruptions. (iii)Findings The College scores the points at Level 2 with the focus interrupted.The Union submits that the focus interrupted should be at Level 3.Therefore,both sides agree that the focus is interrupted.I note that the point scoring for focus interrupted is 35 at Level 2 and at Level 3 the focus maintained points are the same at 35.Therefore,the real difference here is does the work of the position require regular and recurring long periods of concentration or does it require extended periods of concentration.The cut off between 6 Level 2 and 3 is found in the definitions.Level 2 is periods up to 2 hours after that Level 3 applies where periods of concentration extended must occur for periods of more than 2 hours.The Union establishes that there are certainly times when a particular project will require concentration for more than 2 hours.This is particularly true when performing work on weekend time slots when the systems can be shut down.The Union has established that this occurs frequently enough that the definition of extended periods of concentration are more than 2 hours on many assignments but not all.The parties hearing submissions were directed at the focus interruption requirement but both sides agree which ever level it is the focus is interrupted.I find that there is sufficient frequency of concentration for more than 2 hours at one time to justify the rating of Level 3.While the College makes the point that the client support and incident management does carry with it by its nature interruptions,the difficulty is that the PDF assigns only 10%of the time as applying to this type of work.The Union submissions focus much more on the bigger non-routine support which is a much larger proportion of the time spent on the work of the position.The Union has established that Level 3 is the appropriate Level with an interrupted focus. Factor #11.-Working Environment:Ratings:College Level 2,Union Level 3 This factor looks at the environment in which work is performed and the extent to which there exists undesirable or hazardous elements. (i)The Union It is submitted that there is some heavy weight lifting in awkward positions which justify the Level 3 working conditions.It is submitted that the noise levels in the server room are high which the College acknowledges and does provide hearing protection gear. (ii)The College It was submitted at the Hearing that the College is turning its attention to Health and Safety Issues in the Grievor's workplace and change is in progress. (iii)Findings The Union has not established the necessary evidence to suggest that the Factor has been incorrectly pointed.Therefore,there is no adjustment to the pointing. 7 CONCLUSION 9.The change in point scoring as a result of this Award adds 71 points to the total submitted on behalf of the College.That makes the total 692 points which places the position within Payband J on the Schedule in the Manual.As a result,the Grievor is to have his pay adjusted from the date of the grievance,being March 12,2019.The College is to make the retroactive pay adjustment within three full pay cycles from the date of this Award (because of the Holiday Season). 10.The parties are hereby directed to take the necessary steps in order to implement this decision.If there are any disputes as to the implementation of my Award,I retain jurisdiction to resolve those disputes and issue a supplementary award to complete the process of ensuring that the remedy is complete and the Grievor is made whole to the extent that may be required. 11.I will remain seized of this matter with jurisdiction to complete the remedy in this Award for a period of 60 days from the date herein.Either party may on written request to the Arbitrator ask me to reconvene the hearing for the purposes of determining the remedial aspects of this Award. 12.If no written request is received within the stipulated time frame,I will no longer retain jurisdiction over the implementation of the remedy arising from this Award. DATED AT LONDON,ONTARIO THIS DAY OF DECEMBER 2019. Richard H.McLaren Arbitrator 8 Arbitration Data Sheet -Support Staff Classification college:Algonquin College Incumbent:Ben Bourdeau Supervisor_ Lyle Fisher KCurrentPaybandPaybandRequestedbyGrievor:- 1.Concerning the attached Position Description Form: ®The parties agreed on the cOntent 0 2.The attached Written Submission is from ® The Union.disagrees with the contentsand the specific details areattached. The Union 0 The College Factor Management Union Arbitrator Regular!Recurring Occasional Regular!Recurring Occasional Regular!Recurring Occasional Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points 1A.Education 4 48 4 48 't¯ lB.Education 3 21 3 21 3 - 2.Experience 4 54 4 54 Lf 3.An&ysisand Problem 4 110 4 110 //0 4.Planning/Coordinating 2 32 3 56 3 ,5', 5.Guiding/Advising Others 3 29 3 29 _____ 3 , _____ 6.Independence of Action 3 78 -- 4 110 -_____ j /1 0 ____ 7.Service Delivery 3 51 -- 3 51 ______ 3 5_I 8.Communication 3 78 -- 3 78 -_____ 3 1S -____ 9.Physical Effort 3 47 - 3 47 ____ 3 L.L-.- ____ 10 AudIo/Visual Effort 2 3 ,3 50 ____ 11.Working Environment 2 38 ____ 3 ____ 69 3 S ____ Subtotals (a)586 -- (b)35 (a)673 -______ (b)50 (a)&j 9 -_____ (b)0 Total Points (a)+(b)621 723 RcsultirigPayband I - K Signatures GrIivor)(Date)"(College Re tative) - (Date)I - J,io"ri4;i o/7Cloepren (10,2019 Dec.13,2019 (Arbitrator's Si nature)('ate of Hearing)(Date of Award)