HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-0066.Cho-Chu et al.82-11-09IN THE MATTER OF ANARBITRATION
66/82
Between:
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
Before:
For the Grievor:
For the Employer:
Hearings:
OPSEU (Yvonne P. Cho-Chu et al)
Grievors
And -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Correctional Services)
Employer
M. Teplitsky, Q.C. Vice Chairman
T. Traves Member
A. G. Stapleton-' Meinber
N. Luczay
Grievance/Classification Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
J. Benedict
Manager, Staff Relations
Ministry of Correctional Services
August 17, 1982
August 26, ,1982
i
, The grievors are each classified as Clerk 3 General
and each fills the position of'documents processing clerk in
the Ministry of Correctional Services. They claim that they
are improperly classified and should be classified as Clerk 4
General.
The jurisprudence of this Board establishes alternate
bases for success on'such a grievance. The grievors can succeed
by proving either that they fall within the classy standard of
Clerk 4 General, or that other employees performing~for all
practical purposes the same duties as the grievors are classified
i
as Clerk 4 General.
For convenience I set out the current position
specification as well, and the class standard for Clerk 3
General and Clerk 4'General.
* -
-3-
_..-..
coRRccTkwl ScRVICES PLAWIffi AW SUPPORT SERVICES
UWAOMNT DATA SERVICES '-ItuuE oars"-
a*-" MION s"w."U-l~"* 4 i =--%s lyiy i -a&W NUN OFFICE. SCAMYJR~~, ONTARIO
'.~"R~TOF)OSITIONOI(*mo~*mO*,,,mnrR~oumr"nU
To prossl infm!mtim and mintsin irwt cmtrols in OrdertD~provide accurate end tilPeiY infonetim to the c~utarired Adult ‘Infonnstion Systm (including sub-eystsms Client
Infomntim and Intitutim AcWnistratlon), md the Cays Stat System.
To pePform other
rdated duties.
Scanning incoming deewants (a&it cards, log-s. etc.) for legibility, accuracy and
c&#etmeaa; resolving irrrmraciea prior to processing, e.g ., correctiq codes, contacting
field offica, to clarify infomatim; maintaining batch and innate Rllber logs; cmtacting him akim if innate wabara-~~o~~~ro~srly recorded; emuring timnly sutiseim of batchen to ksy-
punch: dotsmining andw+ypunch errors: correcting edit errora (100 possible) UP
dateerrors ;lllO pasible) '%d IAS tit awxsI by ustannining, and initiating apprceriata ccucm of action,. using error mdsseqa nawals &sstabUshd prectic011, e.g., contacting fisl offices. searching fiIa for cnrract information, re-sutaittinq data, daleting, adding or chmq.iq data m-o anin file to erawe individual file for innatea (ma file mny mistakenly cork
date-v-!,pr 4 imatesi; merging file3 who0 mope than me fi:s exists m imta~r3&‘~~‘P ;.17-2-ZZ#dateminiq-If erro* ‘ms a system0 error, and dowm&ta to supervisor; answing accuracy of MS by chrkirq irOut referriq all suwortmg
d DcrmanIs against crrapltsr
Printwts end control logs: distribu+.ing dacmen ts upcm receipt frm keypunch. e.g., sdnit car
to smtenes suditon. missing ranbet lists to institutions, etc.; initiating COrrecti?m for
sma ?eport.s recsived frca ccqmter, e.g., files vithcut nams, or main file ru&ars, onawerin inquiries frm field offices regarding the proper use of coding, e.g..
immte recc0rd.a clsr!a, P. & P. clerical staff, stc .; req,,estinq ad diatributinq ce&mrtS such
aa hiatmy profiles, HAINNX lists. etc.
10% - 2. !&inteins infarmatim m thm Caya Stay System by!
Enwring accuracy and co&etmaem of institution’s daily cmt, +cstim and cmt
I’
updats docuwnts; cartacting institution for cmfirmatim or correct infopmtion; revising dat
through additlms, dalstims, changed, as a rsault of error message3 ( Wpossibls error -eseagss), after verifying informtim with institution: rsquwting and distributing six
Ability to work m a initiative in clsrifying/vcrifying input, follaing up m errore: good
oral c.amuni cation skills: *orking kmhdga of mintmama of AIS and Deys Stay Systm and
corrnpmding mawds; kmdedqe of imat. records dccM(Mt8.
The irmmbmt:
. . Performs
rwtins claricnl work of sme conplsxity according to satablished practices end
pmcedures:
a judgment is sxsrcised by aelecting altsrwtivss within I) frmemrk of guidelines;
s
j c inistive exercised by follaing up errors, missions and taking corrective action.
/ ma.,%? , y”,- , ‘rJ?%N-
.
-4-
CLW DEFWITION:
Bnployees in positions allocated to this class, as njoumey-
man .clerks+, perform routine clericd work of some complexity accord-
ing to established procedures requiring a background knowledge of apec-
ific regulations, rtatutes or local practices. Decisionmaking involves 8ome judgment in the selection of alternatives within a comprehensive
framework of guidelines. Initiative is in the form of following up errors
or omissions and in making corrections as necessary; Doubtful matters
not .covcred by precedent are referred to supervisors. Much of the work
is reviewed only periodically, principally for adherence to policy and
procedures.
Typical tasks at this level include the preparation of factual
reports, statements or memoranda requiring some judgment in the selec-
tion and presentation of data; assessment of the accuracy of statements
or eligibtity of applicants, investigating discrepancies and securing
further proof or documentation as necessary; overseeing, as a Croup
leader, the work of a smsll subordinate staff by explaining procedures,
assigning and checking work.
This is a tesminal class for many positions involving the cpmpetent
- performance of routine clerical work common,to.the office concerned.
QUALIFIC4TIOXS :
1. ,Crade 12 or an equivalent combination of education, training and
experience.
2. About three years setisfactoy clerical uqrerience.
3. Ability to understand and explain clerical procedures and require-
ments; ability to organize and complete work assignments within
prescribed’time limits; ability to maintain good working
ships with other employees and the public served. relation-
CLERK 4, GEXE4UL ,
. .
CUSS DEFIUTIOM:
&ployees in positions allocated to this class perform a
oariety.of responsible clerical tasks requiring a good background
knowledge of specific regulations , statutes or local practices.
Decision-making involves judgment in dealing with variations from
established guidelines or standards. Normally, employees receive
specific instructions only on unusual or special problems as the
work is performed under conditions that permit little opportunity
for direct supervision by others. Hatters involving decisions that
depart radically from established practices are referred to super-
visors.
-f-
Tasks typical of this level include the evaluation or assess-
ment of a variety of statements, applicafions, records or similar
materiel to check for conformity with specific regulations, statutes
or administrative orders, resolving points not clearly covered by
these instructions, usually by authorizing adjustments or recosssend-
iflg payment or acceptance; supervising a small group of sjourneyman
clerks” or a larger group of clerical assistants by explaining proce-
dures, assigning and checking work and maintaining discipline.
QUALIFICATIONS:
1. Grade 12 education or an equivalent combination of education,
training and exgmrience.
2. About four years. of progressively responsible clericd exper-
ience or an equivalent combination of experience and higher
educational quslifications.
3. Ability to conumnicate clearly both orally and in writing;
ability to instruct and supervise the work of subordinates. .
These class standards were apparently last revised in
1963. . It is obvious that the position held by these grievors
did not exist and was not in anyone's contemplation when the
standard was first prepared. I found it extraordinarily diffi-
cult to relate either the standard for Clerk 3 General or the
standard for Clerk 4 General to the duties performed by these
grievors as set forth in the specification. Mr. Gibson attempted
in his evidence to explein why the grievors were properly classi-
fied as Clerk 3 General rather than Clerk 4 General. Although
I believe that he was sincere in the'giving of his evidence, I
was nevertheless left with the impression that the exercise was
very artificial.
The burden is on the grievors.to bring themselves
within the class standard of Clerk 4 General. They have not satis-
fied me in this respect on a balance of probabilities. Suffice
:
- 6 -
to say,
I do not believe that they perform *a variety of responsible
tasks"--as required by the class standard of Clerk 4 General.
I should add that if there is no other class standard
.into which these grievors fit more naturally than that of Clerk
General, perhaps one could be fashioned.
I turn to consider the alternative argument, namely,
whether there are other employees performing for all practical
purposes the same duties who enjoy a higher classification. I
Where the evidence discloses other employees who are performing
for all practical purposes ,the same duties and who enjoy a higher
classification, an inference arises that the practices of the
employerhave supplanted or altered the classification.standard.
Employees are ~entitled to be classified against the "de facto"
classification standard.
In this case, the grievors referred to two other
positions in the Ministry of Housing which,carry the Clerk 4
General classification. The incumbent in one of the positions
testified that he.had greater responsibilities than do the
grievors. Although his position was similar in many respects
it is also different and it is impossible for me to conclude
that whoever classified him as Clerk 4 General in the Ministry
of Housing was wrong and his position does not provide for me
any credible evidence from which I can draw an inference that
the employer has applied the standards inconsistently and h,as
altered the standard.
- 7 -
I have reached the same conclusion with respect to the
other position and for the same reasons.
I appreciate that the griever's job has changed and is
~~now more complex than it had been. In the private sector such
a change would have probably carried with it a salary increase in
addition to any annual increase. However;under a classifica-
tion system such as is in place in the public sector, a.change
in work load or responsibility itself does not trigger a salary
1 adjustment unless the job overall, as changed, is improperly
classified. For the reasons which I have given, I do not find
that it was and the result is that the grievance must be dis-
missed.
DATED at Toronto this 9th day of November, 1982.
M. Teplitsky, Q.C. Vice Chairman
"I dissent" (see attached)
Tzesz;b,
,
A.G. Stapleton Member
-8-
DISSENT
With respect, I must disagree with the majority award in this case. 1
am satisfied that the Grievers have not clearly brought themselves w.ithin the
class standard of Clerk 4 General, but in contrast to the majority i am convinced
that there are other employees performing for all practical purposes the same
duties who are classified at the higher level. The Union called two witnesses,
both working in the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing at the Clerk 4
General level. While one of these witnesses, Mr. Edgar Radan, has assumed more-
complex and varied responsibilities than the Grievors, the other,
Ms. L.E. Dassakis, appeared to me to perform tasks very similar in character to
those of the Grievors. The Employer did not dispute this view, but depended on
the rather lame argument . that It was Ms. Dassakis, not the Grievers, who were
misclassified. No evidence was called to substantiate this claim. The Employer
also failed to call other witnesses to show that even if the Grievers do work
similar to Ms. Dassakis, hers is but an exception among a much larger pool of
workers classified at the higher level and performing different functions with
more responsibility. Under the circumstances, the Union, in my view, proved
that the Grievors were performing a job similar to or substantially the same as
another employee classified at the Clerk 4 General level and their grievance
should have been upheld.
/lb
T. Traves Member
.