HomeMy WebLinkAboutWallis et al 20-10-09IN 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")
GROUP GRIEVANCE of
Dana Copeland,Liisa Pelot and Faith Wallis
OPSEU File No.2018-0109-0005/0006/0007
(hereinafter the "Grievors or the Incumbents")
ARBITRATOR:
REPRESENTING THE UNION:
Richard H.McLaren,C.Arb.
Liisa Pelot -Grievor &Spokesperson
Ron Kelly -Second Vice President
Adam Rayfield -First Vice President
REPRESENTING THE COLLEGE:Laura Holmes,Human Resources
Specialist
Pam McLaughlin,Dean,Faculty of
Health,Community Studies &Public
Safety
Julie McQuire,Employee Relations
Consultant
A HEARING IN RELATION TO THIS MATTER WAS HELD AT LONDON,ONTARIO ON
05 OCTOBER 2020.
1
AWARD
Background
The Academic Advisor position at Fanshawe College (the "College")was created in
2004 and known as a Student Success Advisor ("SSA").The position was revised
in July 2018.Four SSA's filed a Group Job Classification Grievance in 2018.While
they may not have played a meaningful role and participated in the process of
revision the College produced a Position Description Form (the "PDF")for the
Academic Advisor.The revised PDF was initially rated and classified by the Job
Evaluation Committee on 18 October 2018 as a Payband H.The dispute
continued with the Union and the PDF was revised and re -rated and classified at
Payband I on 18 October 2018.
Pam McLaughlin is the Dean of the Faculty of Health,Community Studies and
Public Safety.She provides oversight to the College wide Academic Advisors
("AA")through regular meetings,providing professional development
opportunities and ensuring consistency in academic advising throughout the
College.
The Grievance
Dana Copeland,Liisa Pelot and Faith Wallis filed individual grievances (the
"Grievors"or "Incumbents")on 24 September 2018.The Grievors allege that
their positions are incorrectly evaluated at Payband H and should be classified at
Payband J.The grievances were dealt with on a consolidated basis before me.All
the Grievors occupy positions now known as an AA.
The College evaluated the position and rated it at 592 points,placing the position
within Payband I in accordance with the "Support Staff Job Evaluation Manual"
(the "Manual").The Grievors and the Union submit that the position ought to be
evaluated at 685 points placing it in the higher rated Payband J.The Grievors
seek to have their position reclassified by this arbitration to the higher Payband.
2
The Position,Duties and Role
The position of an AA is to support the academic lifecycle of a student.They offer
academic and personal advising to students grounded in developmental,proactive
advising and lifecycle approaches.The AA actively participates in college retention
and student success initiatives.They also complete a wide variety of administrative,
data -tracking and reporting duties in support of student success.Two of the
Grievors,Dana Copeland and Faith Wallis,report to the Associate Dean of the
Lawrence Kinlin School of Business.Lilsa Pelot reports to the Dean,Faculty of
Creative Industries.
Part of the duties of an AA is to meet with students and offer guidance by providing
advice on academic choices,helping to develop their skills to promote academic
success.They also may refer students to other appropriate College supports such as
Counselling and Accessibility,Pathway Advisors or Program Coordinators.The AAs
also assist students who are at an at-risk academic status.In those cases,they
provide alternatives for the student to consider maintaining enrolment in their
program or at the College.Where appropriate the AA also conducts group advising
sessions to share strategies on relevant areas such as the development of study
skills.All of the foregoing duties represent approximately 60%of the work of the
position.
Another 25%of the work of the position is participating in meetings and operational
tasks to encourage student success and retention.In this role the AA is required to
keep detailed,confidential notes of student meetings and interactions ensuring any
documentation complies with school,departmental and College guidelines.In this
role,the AA works collaboratively with Program Coordinators,faculty members and
support staff to discuss general student issues and work towards a shared solution.
The balance of the work of the position involves supporting the Associate Dean with
tasks related to student success and retention.The remaining duties amounting to
about 5%are related to keeping current on the practice and developments in
Academic advising.
Factors in Dispute
There are five factors in dispute between the parties:Analysis and Problem
Solving;Guiding and Advising;Independence of Action;Service Delivery and
Communications.Each of these factors in dispute is dealt with below under their
separate headings.
3.Analysis and Problem Solving:Ratings:College Level 4/Union Level 4 +05
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.
Findings
The College and the Union agree that the regular and recurring work for this
Factor is appropriately rated at Level 4.The difference is that the Union asserts
that on an occasional basis the work of the position is at Level 5.
For tasks to rise to Level 5 the problems must be '..complex and multi-faceted
with symptoms being vague or incomplete."Many of the issues or "symptoms"a
present-day student has tend to coalesce.A driving principle of the College is to
treat students holistically.In order to do so the AA must equate poor academic
performance with other symptoms affecting a student.There is a range of such
symptoms which may include racism,violent behavior,familial and personal
issues,medical problems,learning or other disabilities.Any of these issues may
impact a student's academic success and progression.The AA must identify these
issues,which may well be vague or incomplete,in order to engage in appropriate
analysis or problem solving.While not every student has these symptoms the
rapidly expanding student population (e.g.29.7%enrollment increase over the
previous four years)and the increasing international mix means that the ethnicity
ri
and diversity of the student population is requiring better developed analytical
and problem -solving skills on behalf of AAs.This rapid growth and change often
means that the established College techniques are lagging behind the changes
thus requiring the AA to use professional training and generally accepted
principles to do problem solving.
For all of the foregoing reasons I find that all of the wording of Level 5 is present
in the tasks of an AA from time to time.Therefore,I conclude that the Union has
established that the position ought to be rated at Level 4 regular and recurring
and an Occasional Level 5.
5.Guiding/Advising Others:Ratings:College Level 4,Union Level 5
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.
Findings
An AA must develop a collaborative relationship between themselves and the
student advisee.An important part of that process is to gain the trust of the
student.The AA may be called upon to humanize the College to a puzzled
international student and to be a mentor to all advisees.It is in these actions that
an AA gains the trust of the student.
To be an accomplished AA,a person must nurture the student advisee while
upholding,and when required,explain the specific policies,procedures and values
of their departments and institutions.This requires clear,honest and respectful
lines of communications with both the student advisee and those not directly
involved in the advising process but who must make authorative decisions
impacting student success and progress.While they have a delicate balance to
maintain between advisee and those who make impact decisions they are not '..
allocating tasks to others".In so doing they may be providing "guidance and
advice to ensure completion of tasks."But the essential task of being responsible
5
for allocating tasks to others is missing.While they do allocate tasks to their
student advisees that is not what the term "others"refers to in Factor Level 5;it
refers to "others"meaning beyond the work scope of the person's direct job
functions.If "others"is to include the student advisee the AA still does not fit in
the Level because an AA does not have responsibility for the student's completion
of tasks assigned.It is up to the student maybe with encouragement of the AA to
complete the task.In all of the foregoing circumstances the better fit for the AA
position is at Level 4 in that they "advise"the student and have '..on going
involvement in their progress"which puts the position squarely in Level 4.
For all of the foregoing reasons,I conclude that the Union has not established that
the rating is inappropriate.No change in the scoring is to be made.
6.Independence of Action:Ratings:College Level 3/Union Level 4 +05
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.
Findings
The parties are far apart on the rating of this Factor and in their submissions on it.
The Union asserts that not only is the Level incorrect but also that while working
at their submission of Level 4 the AA has occasional work at Level 5.
Decision making in the AA role requires an understanding of the student lifecycle,
measurements of academic success and the role of other departments at the
College.The trust relationship with the advisee comes into play once again in the
submission of the Union.They submit that treating a student holistically involves
developing a relationship where the student feels safe to disclose sensitive,
personal and private information.They can do so because they trust their AA to
help them solve problems and to advocate on their behalf.The trust aspect of
the position has already been taken account of in the "Analysis and Problem
Solving"Factor.The Independence Factor relates to the degree of autonomy that
the AA has in their position.Student trust and autonomy of decision making is
not the same thing.
However,the AA also acts as an essential buffer between student advisees and
faculty.In that role they have both legal and ethical obligations to maintain
student privacy.The College pursues a strategy that requires that student
information is on a "need to know"basis.If another employee of the College
need not to have access to private information;then,they ought not to have that
information.The AA is required to make decisions about sharing student
information with College employees;and,the timing,manner and amount of
information to release.An AA has to make these decisions alone but within the
objective of advancing student success and advocating for the advisee.In that
role the AA must make decisions according to specific goals or objectives and in
so doing use industry practices and departmental policies.Therefore,an AA has
the autonomy to act within these boundaries and need only consult with a
supervisor on issues that are outside of these parameters.While arguments are
made by both sides surrounding general "guidelines","industry practices"and
"College policies",which are the buzz words of Levels 3,4 and 5,that of itself
does not reflect the purpose of the Factor which is to rate the degree of
independence or autonomy in the position.Not the actions being taken as
against the different levels of resources to take them such as "guidelines",
"industry practices"and "College policies".The parameters are prescribed,and
the decision of an AA in relation to a student advisee is made within those
parameters on an autonomous basis.Therefore,I find that the position is
required to carry out their duties at a Level 4 as described in the Manual.
The College points out that an AA is required to follow general processes to
complete their duties.In the Notes to Raters it is stated that at Level 3 '..specific
results or objectives that must be accomplished are pre -determined by others."In
this context for an AA position the person follows situations that involve transfers,
course selection or withdrawals.The AA is not able to deviate from the processes
7
without input from the faculty or program coordinator or approval from an
Associate Dean.Thus,the degree of autonomy the AA has is circumscribed by the
general process and procedures of the College.Any deviation,to the extent that
it may be allowed,must be approved by faculty or those in authority over the AA.
Therefore,the degree of independency or autonomy does not come close to Level
5 where duties are completed,and decisions made using College policies.The
decisions of an AA are within confines that do not require action according to
broad goals or objectives despite the illustrative examples of the Union in its
brief.
I find that what the AA is doing is maximizing the student experience and
opportunities by using their experience and knowledge of how the College
operates in its practices and procedures.However,in so doing they have to take
action and make decisions as described above that are autonomous and
independent.The best fit is the Level 4 description.
For all of the foregoing reasons it is found that the Union has established the
grounds to rate the Factor beyond Level 3.The better fit in an objective analysis
is the Level 4 and the rating is to be changed to reflect that rating for this Factor.
The Union goes on to "glide the lily"by asserting that the AA occasionally works
at a Level 5.As discussed above the independence of the position does not
require action according to broad goals or objectives.The academic outcome for
any advisee is established in the course outline and supported by school and
faculty processes and procedures.An AA has discretion in guiding a student on
selecting a course of action such as recommending a specific tool to help a
student improve their study skills,however the ultimate goals are outlined in
academic requirements and not in broad goals or objectives which is the
requirement at Level 5.Therefore,I find that the Union has not established that
the position ought to be rated at an Occasional Level 5.
[4]
7.Service Delivery:Ratings:College Level 3 /Union Level 4
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.
Findings
Without a doubt an AA tailors their services to an individual advisee,each one is
different.That is functioning at a Level 3 in Service Delivery.To be at Level 4 the
AA must anticipate the advisee's requirements and pro -actively deliver service.
The AA in making recommendations to a student may have to develop contingent
plans depending on student academic factors such as failing to meet academic
standards.In addition,the AA may have to take account of the fact that the
advisee is perhaps also being unable to meet standards because of other familial,
personal or interpersonal reasons or circumstances such as poverty or medical
conditions.In order to satisfy these variety of circumstances in which an advisee
may find themselves the AA must draw up contingency plans for the student.
Such anticipation requires a very pro -active response to the known givens.
Therefore,the service provided is inherently anticipatory and pro -active.The
presentations to students when orientation at the College occurs is also in the
same category.
For all of the foregoing reasons,I find the Union has established a higher rating
Level 4.The point rating for the Factor is to be changed in accordance with this
Award.
8.Communication:Ratings:College Level 4 I Union Level 4 +05
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
Findings
The Union and the College agree that the Communication Factor skill level is
correctly rated at Level 4 as regular and recurring.The disagreement is whether
on occasion the level of communication is at Level 5.
Level 5 involves '..imparting information in order to obtain agreement,where
interest may diverge,and/or negotiation skills to resolve compel situations."
There is no doubt that the AA faces divergent interests in the student population
and also with parental goals which may come in conflict with academic success.
The AA has to be the advocate for their advisee and support them in their
approach for exceptions or exemptions from academic requirements.To
accomplish this,they must manage the relationship of the student to a professor
or a counsellor or co-op employer.The examples provided by the Union do
highlight the fact that at times it is necessary to inform,mediate and negotiate
with others on behalf of their advisee.
I find that the Occasional Level 5 ought to be part of the scoring for this Factor.
The Union has established that the rating is justified.Therefore,the point scoring
needs to reflect this.
10
CONCLUSION
Following a thorough review and subject to the foregoing reasons,I find that the
Union has been successful in establishing that four of the five Factors require
adjustment.It is ordered that the College alter the PDF ratings in accordance with
this Award.
Based on all of the above adjustments,the total points assigned for the position
will rise to be 664.That point score places the position in Payband J on the
Schedule in the Manual.As a result,the Grievors are entitled to a retroactive pay
adjustment from the date of the grievance on the 24th of September 2018 up to
the date of payment in accordance with this Award.The College is given three
pay periods from the date of this Award to make the retroactive payment to the
Grievors.
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 Grievors.The Arbitrator
reserves the right to make the Grievors whole and determine the amounts to be
paid to them 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
Grievors.
DATED at LONDON,ONTARIO this gth day of OCTOBER 2020.
Richard H.tvlcLaren,C.Arb.
Arbitrator
11
Arbitration Data Sheet -Support Staff Classification
College:Incumbent:Supervisor:Current Payband:Payband Requested by Grievor:
1.Concerning the attached Position Description Form:
o The parties agreed on the contents
The Union disagrees with the contents and the specific detalls are attached.
2.The attached Written Submission is fronitZl The COge The Union
¯
¯..:¯¯¯:¯:.
F tRegular/-ac or-
¯
.:Z :¯:::-
nemeni -r 'r
Recurring
__________
Occasional
____________________________________________
Regular!
Recurring Occasional Regular/
.Recurring Occasional
Level Points Points1 Level Points Level Points Level Points Level Points
1A.Education 4 48 4 48 1///
_____
____________
lB.Education
--
1 1 3
_____
1 3
2.Experience 4 4 54 L/5
3.Analysis and Problem Solvi 4 110 4 110 .5 9 4'1/0 ~j
4.Planning/Coordinating 3 56
_____
3 56
_____
51a _____
5...Guiding /Advising Others 4 41 5 53.
_____
_______________-_______________
6.Independence of Action 3 78
_____
4 .110 5 //¯-1
7.Service Delivers(3 51
____
4 73 7L
__________
8.Corn muniéation .4 110
_____.
4 110
_____
sj
_____
9 LL Ii 0 5'j
9.Physical Effort 1 5j
__________-
1 5
_____-L __________
10.Audio /Visual Effort 2A A 20
_____
2fr 2Q
11.Working Environment 1 71 2 9 1 7 2 9 /51_¯9
Subtotals (a)5831(b)9 (a)649 (b)36
-
(a)
-_____
(b)29
Total Points (a)+(b)
.
592 j685 ,,&/
Resulting Payband
_____
____________
zT
Signatures:
_____________________(Date)
_______
(Grievor)(Arbitrator)
o (Date)O4 K/2217 (DateofHearing)
(Union Represent4)
o (Date)I (Date of Award)C 2 1
(College Representative)