HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-1032.McKillop et al.86-11-05- EWLOIEES
GRIEVANCE
SETTLEMENT
BOARD
a0 [wvD*5 SmEET )(ESK lcbwMTD. cwAwo. Yso r.79~ sum 21w 1032184, 1033184
1034ia4, 1036/84
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN:-
OPSEU (M. McKillop, M. Sprague, R. Arthur, A. McCall) Grievers
- And -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Transportation & Communications) Employer
BEFORE: E. B. Jolliffe Vice-Chairman
S. J. Dunkley Member
G. 3. Milley Member
For the Griever: A. Ryder
Counsel
Gowling & Henderson
Barristers & Solicitors
For the Employer: S. Barty
Head
Personnel Services
Northwestern Region
Hearing: May 13, 1985
- 2 -
DECISION
When'these grievances came on for hearing,'the grievor
Malcolm McKillop testified in support of his claim that the work
of his crew in the Thunder Bay District --- and particularly of
himself --- involved by necessity repair and maintenance work as
well as the operations normally required in other Districts
throughout Ontario. -___
Mr. McKillop and the three other grievors are classified
as Highway Equipment Operators 3, and they claim that they ought
to be classified as "Maintenance Mechanic 2 or equivalent.'
,Their primary duties are to paint solid and broken lines on
highways in the Thunder Bay District of the Ministry of
Transportation. These highways extend from Ignace on the west as
far as Pickle Lake (about half-way to Hearst) and on the Trans-
Canada east to Marathon and also highways reaching the United
States border on the south. _-.-
There is only one paint crew in the District, but
according to Mr. McKillop the area for which. the crew is
responsible has become “at least four times bigger than it used
to be.” All the paint work must be carried out between June and
November; overhauls and major repairs or reconstruction are
s
- 3 -
done during the winter and spring months. There are of course
breakdowns in the equipment during the summer, which must be
remedied by the Operations crew or a local garage because they
are far removed from headquarters at Downsview (which is in
Metropolitan Toronto1 and often distant from the District Base at
Thunder ‘Bay. What makes winter overhauls in Thunder Bay
different from conditions in southern districts is that it has
been carried out by at least two of the grievors (and their ,.I~'
foreman) rather than by the District Garage mechanics.
-
Of course there have been changes in the technique and
equipment used. Mr. McKillop said that in 1979 "spray guns" were
used. In 1980 hot paint was introduced, replacing cold paint,
to be applied'by a rebuilt vehicle with another unit behind.it.
The advantage is that the heat makes the strips dry more quickly
and the crew no longer uses cones to warn motorists. The outfit
moves at 10 to 15 kilometres per hour. Each week-end, whenever
(. possible, the crew leaves its equipment and returns to Thunder
Bay in a van.
Mr. McKillop said the new equipment has more complicated
components, tolerances are very fine and breakdowns are frequent.
Minor repairs are performed on the road; if the crew happens to
be near Hearst, they take advantage of the Ministry's garage
there. There are no mechanics at the satellite garages which
service winter equipment.
>~ 3
- 4 -
In earlier years, Mr. McKillop.worked in winter on snow-
plows, but Since -1979 he has had to do repair and maintenance
work on the "striper" at Thunder Bay together with Mr. Doug
McMillin, the zone paint foreman. They would tear the unit apart
and rebuild it, while the other crew'members continued to do
winter snow-plowing. In 1980-81, Mr. McKillop rebuilt the unit
with Mr. R. Arthur, one of the other grievors, but in 1981-82 he
again did it with the foreman. in the spring~of 1983 the whole
crew was called in to assemble the equipment, which had beeri
taken aphrt by mechanics in the winter but not re-assembled.
This assignment took about one month,.according to Mr. McKillop.
In September, 1984, Mr. McKillop and three others
grieved that they should be re-classified as Maintenance
Mechanics due to changes in their "duties and responsibilities."
The grievance seems to have brought at least some results. Mr.
McKillop,was required,,to drive the equipment to Toronto for
repairs at the Ministry's "Central Garage." Further, Messrs. _-.-
McMillin, McKillop and Arthur attended two courses given by the
Ministry. Mr. McKillop testified that they received diplomas
relating to the repair and maintenance of strip machines. They
~spent two weeks in Toronto assisting mechanics to rebuild their
equipment.
Mr. McKillop also testified that the.crew succeeded in
eliminating or changing certain components which-were causing
trouble. For example, they had the air-pump ratio changed, they
obtained paint and bead tanks of larger capacity and they
discarded a pump which had proved unsatisfactory.
.
Cross-examined, Mr. McKillop explained that the spray
machine has about 35 components. His repair and maintenance work
had been done on that machine, not on the truck used to move it.
When in operation, the four members of the crew rotate though
four different jobs. He estimated that in summer between five
and 20 per cent of the time is spent in repair work. In the
winter repairs there was no help given by Ministry mechanics.
Mr. Norman Murton, the Zone Paint technician based at
the Downsview headquarters of the Ministry, said nothing to
contradict the testimony. of Mr. McKillop. He has never operated
the paint equipment, but his function is to monitor operations
throughout the province. He agreed that minor repairs are done
by crews on the road and recalled an incident when major repairs
had to be done at a satellite garage in Atikokan, within the
Thunder Bay District.
The next witness was Mr. W.J. Matyczuk, District
Services Supervisor since 1971. He also said nothing
-6-
inconsistent with the testimony of Mr. McKillop. He emphasized
the "great distances* to be covered in the Thunder Bay District,
which made for differences inoperation from those required in
other districts and also called for "better equipment to apply
new paint products." In 19~80 the District had asked Head Office
for more.effective equipment. A prototype was sent from Toronto.
While using it, however, he advised the head of the Engineering
Equipment Section that capacity. was inadequate and the crew had
encountered as much as 53 per cent "down-time." The Ministry
decidedfo let them have new equipment and the crew was then sent
toTorontotoassist incompletingit. The new machine had "most
of the features we wanted" and the crew was now "more concerned
with putting it together than with maintenance." It was.2 he
said, "based on the Thunder Bay design." He added that *as
products improve we run into new problems," but "down-time* has
been reduced to about five per cent.
Questioned further, the witness replied: 'The mechanics I_._
don't really know this type of equipment." He was referring of
course to the striping unit, not to the truck. In his opinion
"no one else in the District" can maintain the machine, but he
conceded that the mechanics "could be trained to do it."
As early as 1981 Mr. Matyczuk had written to the
District Maintenance Engineer~(in Exhibit 7) drawing attention to
-7-
differences in maintaining equipment as between Zone paint
equipment and other vehicles. After discussing the striper
components in detail, he included the following summary:
All the above equipment components are interconnected and to.establish a safe operation all valving and material routing has to be in a definite sequence and
configoration to prevent damage to the equipment, travelling public, operating crew and possible contamination of the various materials. (Paint,
cleaner, heat transfer oil etc.). The crew,also services, repairs and trouble shoots all electrical.
circuitry and cut-offs for the spray equipment. The preceding procedures describe the normal maintenance operations required to operate both a "cold" and "hot" application of paint materials.
Attention was also drawn to health and'safety factors
wh ich are not present in the operation of trucks:
All necessary controls --- electrical and air --- are maintained and serviced to provide its proper operation. To safeguard this process there are, in the system, automatic cut-off and release valves, which if not functioning properly can (i) result in improper paint application temperatures, and (ii) damage the heated
glycol circulating system which can result in an explosion.
In the loading, servicing and application mode the striper operators are expceed to pressurized equipment - tanks and lines - as well as heated materials.
Note: Relatively low air pressures can introduce chemicals and/or toxic materials into the blood stream of an individual if exposure is directly on bare skin or poorly protected bcdy surfaces.
-8-
In Exhibit 8 (also addressed to Mr. B. Walker, the
District Maintenance Engineer) Mr. Matyczuk had already
recommended reclassification of the Zone Paint Crew Operators.
He gave the following reasons:
For the past several years, this topic has been discussed at
various Zone Paint foremen seminars and study workshops. The Foremen and Operators have expressed the strong feeling that
qxratore attached to and performing continued duties on the Paint Crew should be paid at a higher rate than their counterparts attached to patrols. As the supervisor of,this crew I share this . feeling and see the need for the Ministry to recognize the special
skills, training an3 aptitude required by @erators attached to this crew.
Just recently, we have been prompted to review and update all position specifications under our respective supervisions. 'Ihe ~attached, revised position descriptions for the classifications of
Foreman, Striper Operators and Crew Operators on the Zone Paint Crew have been updat4 to more accurately describe their duties. The major difference from the previous descriptions is the inclusion of the activity of maintaining, repairing and cqerating high pressure air and heating systems incorporated into the
equipment assigned to thecrew. This activity is necessary as (1)
there are no District mechanics totally familiar with the operation, etc., of this equipment and able to effect repairs withcut the aid ard expert assistance of.the crew operators, and (ii) it would be impractical to have a mechanic totally trained on this equipment and attached to the crew to effect repair, etc., as required on site during the paint spraying operation in remote _..- areas.
From discussion with the personnel section, it was pointed out
that this Ministry has provided for the recognition of special skills, aptitudes and training to perform work in the Districts which do not fall into the universally recognized journeymen or trades classifications (i.e. Carpentry, Electrical or Plumbing), by the creation of the Maintenance Mechanic Series. A3 a re%ilt, the Ministry's Bridge Crews are in this category in recognition of their specialized skills working carpentry, masonry and steel work activity. Another Specialty Crew which is similarlyraccgnized is
the Sign Shop Production and Erection group, and as a result separate and distinct classifications were created, different from any,other grcup.
-9-
At the.present time the Zone Striper qprators are classified
as Highway Equipment operators 3. While they perform similar an3 equal duties in the winter as Patrol Operators classified as Highway Equipment Operator 3's, their summer activities are definitely different as the patrol group are not involved in the maintenance and repair of specialized equipment, are not exposed to vehicle traffic mr ars required to have special knowledge or expertise as do the Zone Paint Crew members in order to carry out their assigned tasks (i.e. Zone Painting s tam&r&i, specifications and procedures).
As was'the case of the Bridge and Sign Shop crews, the creation of a new operator series - Zone Paint Cperators I, II and III will accomplish two specific points - this act will (1). recognize the "special skills and aptitudes" required by the crew members to function effectively and (21 compensate them fairly for services
rendered. Fortheoperator series a 3%to 4% differential above the equivalent Highway operator series would appear to be in
order, i.e. Highway Equipment Operator 3 + 4% equals Zone Paint Operator 3 wages. The Zone Paint Foreman's wages should be approximately 6% above the Highway General Foreman I's salary. The different percentage is warranted, i.e. 6% for Foreman vs. 4% for cperators as the Zone Paint Foreman position is a closed ended
position where as the Highway General Foreman I position is a training position for eventual promotion to Highway General Foreman II.
In view of the foregoing, I respectivelysubmitthat the Zone
Paint Crew Dperators be seriously considered for exclusion from the Highway Equipment Operators Series and be reclassified into a Zone Paint Cperators Series to properly recognize their function in the Specialty or Service Crew categories.
Further support for reclassification appeared in
Exhibit 9, a memorandum of September 8, 1981, from Mr. Stan
Best, a District Equipment Supervisor 1, addressed to Mr. S.
Barty of District Personnel Services, with a copy to Mr. Walker.
His opinion was expressed as follows:
In regard to your enquiry Re: Classification of Zone Paint
operator positions, I will try and answer your questions.
- 10 -
I consulted with the Shop Foreman to get his feeling on the
subject and he was very helpful in coming up with some of the
results that I will outline.
In question one, there is no doubt that these duties that.are
performed by these operations, do fall in a category above the normal duties of H.E.O.'s.
Question two, It certainly takes at least one or probably two years for an operator to become fully conversant with all the complexities that pertain to this type of equipment, so in essence
nooperator,howeverhighhis grade, would be abletocarry out these duties along with the maintenance skills that are required without a lerngthy training period.
Question three, Apartfromthenormalvehicle repairs, which would also include the compressor, our own mechanics would not be cxmversant with all the multitude of small mzzles, valves, paint containers, lines and switch apparatus that make up this type of machine and would have to rely on the operator to held solve any of these problems. So it would certainly not be feasible to send
out one of our own mechanics to correct any faults pertaining to the specialty equipment associated with this type of aperation.
In summing up this position, I.believe it does require extra
special knowledge and skills that can only be acquired with long performance of these duties that make an ordinary equipment operator something of Maintenance mechanic operator and therefore should be considered for extra renuneration.
As previously explained, in the ensuing three years new
equipment was devised for the Thunder Bay District, equipment
which by all accounts is more satisfactory but even more complex
than the machine previously in use; .'According to the evidence, .
however, it was not until 1984 that personnel officers
circularized other Districts to ascertain how repairs of paint
equipment were being done "across the Province.” This inquiry,
dated. February 13, 1984, and replies from five District officers
--- all in southern Ontario --- are in evidence as Exhibits 10 to
15 inclusive. All the replies-filed with the Board said that
- 11 -
minor repairs were performed on the road by the crew, but annual
overhauls were being done in each District Garage by mechanics.
In other words, none of the five reported the same situation as
existed in Thunder Bay. Nor did they explain the precise nature
of the equipment being used. A typical reply was that of the
Zone Paint Foreman in District 8, based at Kingston, Exhibit 15:
Further to Mr. M&ueen's letter dated February 13, 1984, this .is to advise that the equipment service referenced would normally be the responsibility of a designated District Garage mechanic (level 1 or 2).
Be-cause the equipment is usually in the field, attempts at
repair are made by the Zone PaintCrew (BFG 1 or 85D 3's) on the spot. Usually such repairs are limited to replacement of
units like switches, pusps, and selectorvalves.
Please advise if you require sdditional information.
Exhibits 16 and 17 are so out-dated as to be almost
useless. The former (in 1.970) listed components of the
striping system then in.use. The latter (of the same year) is
marked "proposed", but is said to have been "revised' in May, \..-
1984. It lists highway equipment classified as Types "A", "B" or
"C", with No. 10 in *B" being "Standard MTC Zone StriperlTruck
Mounted) both Gun and Driver Positions," which certainly fails
todescribe the equipment used in recent years by theThunder Bay
District.
Another document in evidence is the "Preamble* to the
*Highway Equipment Operator Series," Exhibit 3, said to have
- 12 -
been "Revised September 1, 1974." Attached to it is "Appendix I
Equipment List," dated 1970. The following explanation appears
in the Preamble:
Many pieces of equipment used by the Ministry staff are classified into three groups depending on the complexity of the equipment and the skill required of the Operator. In
Appendix 1 - Equipment List - Type "A" equipment represents light equipment, 'Qpe "9" heavy equipment, and 'Qps TN heavy
and highly specialized equipment. Type "A" is the lowest rated equipment, Type 08" the next lowest, and l@s "C" is
the highest-rated. Refer to Appendix 1 for equipment listing and rating.
It has already been mentioned that the Thunder Bay Paint
crew grieved in September, 1984, against their classifications as
H.E.0.3. It .is impossible to fit their job into that
classification as it is described in the class series, which also
forms part of Exhibit 3, dated in September, 1974. The
description begins with the words: "Nominees for this class must
meet one of the following requirements* --- of which there are
three:
(a) Must qualify in Maintenance and Cperational tests, in at least 5 units listed under Type "A', and must qualify in Maintenance and Cperational tests in 3 units listed under Type "B*. listed.) (one of these must be from the first seven
Paint Strip Crew members do not meet this requirement
because although they are indeed qualified in 3 “units” listed
- 13 -
under Type 'B', the paint strip machine is not one of the first
seven units listed. As mentioned earlier the Zone Striper is (or'
was) No. 10 in the "B" list. --
(b) Where they are assigned to operate one of the specialized units listed below for at least 70% of the-year's,
working time, they need qualify only in Maintenance and Operational tests and have a high degrees of skill in the operation of the specialized unit of equipment:
(1) Tree Saver or (2) Core Drill Or
(3) Pmer GradeFor (4) Crawler Tract=.
Obviously, the Paint Strip Crew cannot qualify under the
above paragraph.
(cl Candidates who are assigned to operate Type "A" equipment in summer ard who, in winter (whilst cperatirg Qpe "A" equipment), perform the duties of a night patrolman, must qualify in Maintenance and Cperational tests in at least 3 of the first 4 units listed under Type "A".
It is equally obvious that paragraph (cl has no
_.._ application to the work of the Paint Strip Crew.
To add to the confusion, another definition of H.E.O. 3,
also said to have been "Revised September 1, 1974," is attached
to Exhibit 3. In full, it reads as follows:
Class Definition
This class includes positions of Highway Equipment @srators who are assigned to the duties described in one of the following work categories: -
'(al operate l@s 9" equipment in summer and winter for a total of at least 70% of the year's working time;
(bl For a total of at least 70% oftheyear's working time, operate Type "6" equipment and assist the Equipment Operator Instructor (Type Cl, such assistance being less than 40% of the year's working time; .
(~1 operate Type "A" equipment in summer and act as
night patrolman in winter for a total of 70% or more of the year's working time.
Skills and Knu&dqe Required
1. ,Several years of experience ih the operation of highway. equipmentoron related types of machines: an aptitude for driving and anacceptable driving record.
2. Ability to supervise labourers or other assistants.
NOTE:
Assignment of assisting the Equipment Operator Instructor equates to l&e "C" equipment.
Night patrol assignments must be of at least 4 months duration.
Revised September 1, 1974
Again, it is difficult to understand how the work of
Messrs. McKillop and Arthur could be fitted into the definition
- 15 -
just quoted. They have never "operated" the paint strip machine
in both summer and winter. They have operated it and done
repairs in summer, but in several winters they have been required
to overhaul, repair and even rebuild the equipment ornew equip-
ment and in at least one winter the,whol.e crew was called in to
complete an overhaul the mechanics had failed to complete. .
If there exists any classification series more recent
than 1974, it is not in evidence. It seems clear that the
classification system has not been kept up to date.
Nevertheless, a "Position Specification and Class
Allocation Form" was completed in April 1984, Exhibit 6. It gave
the following reasons for classifying the job H.E.O. 3::
Position of employee whcse prime function is to operate Qpe W equipment (e.g. zone paint guns, 5-6 ton truck or grader with plow and wing) in summer and winter for more than 70% of the year's tiris.
This is .confirnmtion of the existing-classification.
For obvious reasons, the zone paint machine is not
operated in summer ,and winter, and in most recent winters it has -
not been the "prime function" of Messrs. McKillop and Arthur to
operate snow-plows.
- 16 -
Again, in May, -1985, another "Position Specification 6
Class Allocation-CSC 6150" was completed , with the same result
for the following stated reasons:
Position of employee whose prime function is to operate Type 'A' equipment (e.g. 2 ton stake truck, hand paint equipment) in the summe~r and acts as Night Patrol Supervisor for at least five months in the winter for more than 70% of the year's working time.
Position of employee whose prime function is to operate Type 'B' equipment (e.g. zone paint guns, 5-6 ton truck or grader withplow and wing) in summer and winter respectively for more than 70% of the year's working time.
This is confirmation of the existing classification.
Various references in the specification to "hand paint
.equipment" reflect an inadequate understanding of the machine now
used in the Thunder Bay District, particularly in Section "A"
which appears to describe some of the work done in other
Districts. An alternative description in.Section "B" is somewhat
closer to the mark, but.fails to take account of the explanations
i.. given in Exhibits 3, 7 and 8 by Mr. Matyczuk, and by District
Supervisor Best in Exhibit 9. There is little or no recognition
of the major repair and overhaul work which has been done
repeatedly by Messrs. McKillop and Arthur, and at times also by
the other two grievors. Under "Skills and Knowledge," it is
said the incumbents are "required to spend approximately 30% of
working time away from headquarters," which is manifestly
incorrect. Perhaps it is difficult for anyone functioning at a
?.
- 17 -
desk in Toronto to grasp the immensity of an area in Northwestern
Ontario such as the Thunder Bay District.
According to his uncontradicted testimony, Mr. McKillop
.did winter snow-plowing~prior to 1979, but from 1979 to 1984 most
of his work in winter and spring was related to the repair,
overhaul, reconstruction or rebuilding of striping machines. He
presented his grievance in September, 1984: in the ensuing winter
he was back on snow-plowing.
I
The grievance alleged that "duties and responsibil-
ities... have changed sufficiently to warrant the classification
of Maintenance Mechanic 2 or equivalent." No doubt there had
been in fact,a significant change, which is c0nfirme.d in the
testimony of Mr. Matcyzuk and in the 1981 memoranda written by
Messrs. Matyczuk and Best, Exhibits 7, 8 and 9.
To return Mr. McKillop to his former winter duty of _..-
operating snow-plows was not an adequate answer to the grievance
presented in September, 1984, nor did it change in any way the
facts as they had existed in five previous winters.
The next question is whether the established facts
justify the claim that the correct classification would be 'that
of "Maintenance Mechanic 2 or equivalent."
- 18 -
The Board was referred of course to Exhibit 4, the
classification series for the "Maintenance Services Category."
The preamble includes four general descriptions of positions in
the category, the first being as follows:
positions inthegeneralskills and trades areas involving
the performance of unskilled, semi-skilled and.skilled work
relating to one or more of the trades and/or involving the operation and servicing of equipment or vehicles. These positions entail such duties as the fabrication, alterations, maintenance, and the operation or repair of buildings, structures, roads, grounds equipment or vehicles.
The definition of "Maintenance Mechanic 1" is not
relevant because it is said that "this class covers positions
where the employees are engaged in work as a general handyman in
routine maintenance tasks requiring limited skills..."
As for "Maintenance Mechanic 2" the first paragraph of
the definition is the following:
This class covers positions where the employees are engaged in semi-skilled work in tasks usually associated with one or more of the skilled trades, or in semi-skilled handyman duties, in the maintenance of a Government buildirrg, institution, field station nor other establishment and its associated equipment and serfices, or in the field. Employees in positions in this class are sufficiently skilled to perform a variety of tasks under general supervision, where the quality of the completed work or the complexity of the tasks does not warrant the services of a qualified skilled tradesman. These employees use power and hand
tools as required and their work is reviewed for an evaluation of the skill attained and quality of the completed work. Assignments become more difficult and the degree of supervision lessens as tha employee acquires increasing skill. These employees must be engaged in maintenance work for at least 60% of their work time.
*
- 19 -
Apparently some importance has been attached to the last
sentence above: "These employees must be engaged in maintenance
work for at least 60% of their work time." The term "maintenance
work" is very broad. If it includes repair work on the road, it
certain_ly matches conditions as they.existed three or four years
ago, when supervisors reported "down-time" of more than 50 per
cent. If down-time has been reduced to 5 per cent, it is
probably due to the skill of the crew in maintaining a machine
with 35 components.
-
In winter and spring Mr. McKillop and Mr. Arthur, at
least until they grieved in 1984, spent much of their time in
overhauling or rebuilding the equipment.. At Thunder Bay they may
have had supervis'ion from their foreman, but Mr. Matyczuk was
emphatic in stating that "even the foreman does not have the
skill or experience of McKillop and Arthur." He also said that
the "mechanics don't really know this type of equipment." In
other words, Messrs. McKillop and Arthur (classified as -_-
"operators") were expected to perform skilled work which skilled
tradesmen at Thunder Bay were not qualified to perform. This was
a situation not lacking in irony, and one which has not yet been
corrected.
Adding another touch of irony the second paragraph of
the definition states:
- 20 -
These employees may assist skilled tradesmen in the performance of their work by substituting for them in completinqthe routine tasks associated with the trade or they may assist maintenance mechanics and skilled tradesmen in a variety of mechanical maintenance tasks.
The third paragraph merely lists numerous examples of
work mechanics in Class 2 may be called on to do, but of course
most of the examples are not relevant in this case. Obviously,
modern zone strip paint machines were not thought of when the
definition was written long ago and last revised in January,
1967, almost 20 years ago. For what it may be worth, the third
paragraph is as follows:
Under general supervision, these employees perform tasks such as: repair walls, windows, frames; repair electrical appliances and equipment: lay floors; erect partitions, fences, etc.: fabricate relatively uncomplicated sheet metal parts: make minor repairs to vehicles~; repair heating and water pressure equipment: repair garage doors; repair bridges, culverts: assist with the repair of electronic equipment: operate sewage and water supply plant for a small institution (less than 500 patients, residents or inmates); repair and re-finishboats, canoes, etc.: buildbacks for gravel or stake trucks: repack valves; install water or steam radiators: repair leaks in stream or water lines: replace boiler tubes: repair stokers: switches, junction boxes, etc.; lay carpets; install drapery track: strip furniture and re-tie springs; make and repair blackboards; repair wheel chairs, beds, kitchen, playground and'gymnasium equipment; braze, weld and solder tractable materials: prepare surfaces and apply paint; service
internal combustion engines and carry out running repairs: shape
metal parts to acceptable tolerances; apply plaster; service air conditioning or refrigeration equipment; and they perform such other tasks as are required within the limits of their skills and competency. They may be required to train and supervise less skilledemployees and such patient, resident, traineeor inmate helpers as are assigned to them.
Qualifications required are the following:
- 21 -
1. Elementary school education, preferably with some trainirrg in the use of annmon hand tools and power eguipment.
2. At least two years' experience as a Maintenance Mechanic I or a combination of formal training and experience acceptable to the Civil Service Camnission as the equivalent.
3. Ability to understand simple plans, diagrams and blueprints, and to carry out written or oral instructions; mechanical aptitude: demcnstrated ability to perform a variety of semi-
skilled mechanical tasks; gccd physical condition.
Of course the grievors do not have two years experience
in Class 1, but Messrs. McKillop and Arthur do have a combination
of formal ,training and experience proved by their performance and -
recognized by their supervisors over several years. They have
certainly demonstrated their ability to do mechanical work which
mechanics at Thunder Bay were unable to do.
Towards the conclusion of the hearing in this case
reference was madetothe policy in relation to "Salary Notes and
Allowances" (authorized in the Ontario Manual of Administration
and in a Civil Service Commission Manual) which has been
discussed before the Board in other cases. Representing the
Employer, Mr. Batty indicated that the possibility of resorting
to a "Classification Note" or "Staffing Note” could be explored'
by the parties with a view to settlement. No offer was made or
accepted but the hearing adjourned on the understanding that the
matter would be further discussed.
- 22 -
Subsequently, as he had undertaken to do, Mr. Barty
supplied the Board with relevant extracts from the Manual of
Administration relating to "Classification and Staffing Notes."
The definition states that: "The salary range of a position in a
class to which a Classification or Staffing Note applies is the
salary range as modified by the terms of the Note." For example,
Note G5 states that: "Manual Workers who are assigned to operate
Type 'A' Equipment in one season in each year, for not less than
40% of the year's working time, shall be permitted,to be paid
one rate above each listed rate in the salary range." --
Also placed before the Board was a memorandum Mr. Barty
had sent to Mr. J. Irvine, Head, Pay and Classification in the
Ministry's Personnel Branch at the Downsview Headquarters. Dated
July 30, 1981, it discussed several different positions.
Referring to the Zone Paint Crew, it was said:
The preamble to the Highway Equipment Operator Series states, "Operators are required to service and clean equipment, report needs for repairs and they may assist mechanics on repair work." The repair work actually being done goes much beyond what is stated in the class standards.
it is the district's contention that the employees should be paid extra for performing the extra level of duties. lhe district has made a passing reference to the Maintenance series. Although its
recommendation is to create a new class series with a higher salary range perhaps the situation could be handled in another way. If it is warranted, this would be to create a,salary note and pay one rate above the established salary rates in the range for the classifications involved.. This would be similar to the salary note for Manual Worker Premium.
- 23 -
The Employees on the zone painting operations do have to have special skills, and training inorder to operate, maintain and
& the high pressure air and heatin;l systems involved.
In the Northwestern Regionhighwaydistances are vast. Tohave mechanics travel out from the district garage to repair the paintiq equipment each time it's needed would place a burden both financially and -rationally on the district's resources. This is especially important in this day of constraint. Also,
employees areelcpressingconcernand a couple of them appear to be restive and want aore my.
Other regions may have a similar situation. Northern Region would probably be the closest to cur own situation. The situation deserves a review as a classificationprojectby all concerned. Youraxnnents are requested.
,There is no evidence that anything of substance was ever *
done about the suggestions made in 1981 by Mr. Barty as well as
Messrs.
Matycsuk and Best.
After the arbitration hearing the matter was allowed to
stand for some time in the belief that the parties would discuss
their problem. Not having heard from either party, the Board
asked Union counsel, Mr. A. Ryder, to report progress.
Thereafter, he advised the .Board on April 29 that *I have had
discussions with Mr. K.B. Cribbie, Staff Relations Officer of the
Ministry and no resolution by this means is open." He enclosed
the following letter to him from Mr. Cribbie: y
Further to our recent telephone conversation I am enclosing a copy of the information which was sent to the Hoard by Stan Harty.
I should advise you that the Hoard does not have jurisdiction to award a salary note nor does Stan Barty have the authority to offer one as a means of settling the above-noted grievances. I
- 24 -
have no explanation as to why this issue'was raised before the Board but whatever the mzionirg behind Mr. Barty's actions might be, he was certainly in error.
At this point I suggest that no further actionbe taken and we
will await the decision of the Jolliffe panel.
The above letter fails to make clear precisely what are
Mr. Cribbie's qualifications, if any, to pronounce judgment on
the Statutory jurisdiction of this Board. Moreover, in fairness
to Mr. Barty, it must be said also that the letter does, not
accurately reflect the position taken by Mr. Barty before the
Board. ;
In the light of all the evidence we do not find it
necessary to make any further comment on the question of Staffing
Notes. It may have been a solution worth considering in the
years between 1980 and 1982,.but nothing came of it. The real
issues in this case are (a) whether the grievors were in
September, 1984, improperly classified as H.E.O. 3 and (b)
whether they were entitled to be reclassified as Maintenance \
Mechanics 2.
In our view, there is not sufficient evidence that the
grievors Michael A. Sprague and Albert J. McCall were'improperly
classified in 1984. They seem to have regularly assisted i,n
operations, in making minor repairs on .the road --- as 'was
implied by Mr. McKillop and others --- and also in one winter
when they were called in with the other grievors to re-assemble
- 25 -
the striping machine. However, it is clear that they were not
held responsible for major repairs and overhauls in the same way
as their two colleagues were.
It is significant that Messrs. McKillop and Arthur were
sent to Toronto for two Ministry courses, and even more signifi-
cant that they participated in the building of a new and improved
machine, which was largely the result of their initiative and
their success in persuading superv,isors that changes were needed
to cope with the peculiar character of the Thunder Bay District.
Our conclusions may now be summarized as follows:
(1 1 The grievances of Messrs. Sprague and McCall, in
which they sought reclassification as Maintenance Mechanics 2,
cannot be upheld and must be dismissed, although it is suggested
that in view of the repair worktheydoonthe road consideration
should be given to a G5 salary note in their cases.
(2j On the evidence as a whole, it is clear that the .
work being done by Messrs. McKillop and Arthur from 1979 to
September, 1984, when they grieved, did not fall within the
classification Highway Equipment Operator 3. In particular, the
overhauls, major repairs, modifications and rebuilding done by
them went far beyond what is required of an H.E.O. 3, and they
were therefore improperly classified.
- 26 -
(3) The work done at material times by the grievors
McKillop and Arthur fell within the definition of a Maintenance
Mechanic 2. In particular, the Board finds that their aggregate
responsibility for maintenance, including minor repairs of
complex equipment and major repairs in winter (which other
mechanics were incapable of completingl'exceeded the minimum 60
per cent‘of working time on maintenance referred to in the Class
Definition.
(4) The Board's decision therefore is that the
grievors;McKillop and Arthur shall be reclassified as Maintenance
Mechanics 2, effective as of the date their grievances were
presented, September 21, 1984.
It is further recommended that revised P~osition
Specifications be prepared to correspond with the realities of
the work being done by the said grievors up to September, 1984.
Dated at Rockwood
November. 5, 1986
EBJ:sol
S. .J. Cdkley, Member