Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-1287.Couture et al.85-07-17:- . 7ELWI 418/588-0888 1287/84,~1288/84 1289184, 129wa4 129x/84 IN THE MATTER OF.AN ARBITRATION Under , THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE'BARGAINING ACT Between: Before: For the Grievor: N. A. Luczay- Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union For the Employer: B. Snider Regional Personnel Administrator Human'Resouroes and Personnel Development Branch Ministry of Health Hearings: Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT ABOARD OPSEU (D. Couture et al) Grievors - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Health) Employer R: J. Roberts, Vice Chairman S. 3. Dunkley Member G. Peckham Member May 30th; 1985 June lOth, 1985 2. DECISION . This is a classiciation case arising out of grievances files by five Couriers at the Whitby Psychiatric Hospital. It was claimed on behalf of the grievors that they were improperly classified in the classisfication of Manual Worker. They clairreci classification of Fotor Vehicle Operator 1. At the outset of the hearing, it was agree3 between the parties that the grievance of Kr. Couture would go forward as representative of all of the grievors, and accordingly, Mr. Couture was the only grievor to give evidence regarding the nature, etc., of his duties. For reasons which follow, the grievances are dismissed. The evidence disclosed that the Whitby Psychiatric Hospital is a large complex locate3 on the shores of Lake Ontario. It comprises some forty-five buildings, spread over approximately 3co acres. A core of thirty buildingshwhich represent those which are mainly occupied,t&es up approximately 200 acres. Mr. J. Holland, the Manager, Material Control and Systems, testified that it would take about five minutes to walk from one side of this core area to the other. . . Mr. Rolland further testified that he organized and implemented a central dispatch system for the Hospital ccmplex. As part of this system, the five Couriers involved.in this arbit:atioc were assigned to report t.2 a Clerk 4 General, who also supervised the Mail an3 photocopy Clerks. Acco:ding to Mr. Holland, the main function of the Couriers was '0 provile various manual courier \ 3. services, and the distribution of heavy eouipment such as furniture and supplies, patient casebooks, lab reports, x-ray reports, timesheets, and the like. These functions were organized on a five-week rotating schedule, through which each of the five Couriers would rotate, one week at a time. A considerable part of Mr. Holland's testimony was devoted to analys~ing the functions that-were performed by Mr. Couture in a typical five-week rotation, in order to determine how . much time he actually would spend driving. It probably is necessary to go through the details of this testimony. The "bottom line" is that, according to Mr. Holland's calculations, the amount of time that Mr. Couture would have spent <n the act of driving was 11% of the total amount of time involved. This was consistent with the summary of duties and responsibilities in the position specification which had been developed for the courier job.. This summary read as follows: 85% 1. Performs various manual functions in providing courier service such‘as': - movement, storage and disposal of facility assets, including furniture, medical surgical equipment, CSR equipment, mattresses; furnishings, etc., dis- tribution of reports, patients' charts, urgent mail, medication slips, maintenance project materials, etc. Performs all functions with care- and..in a prompt, court,eo.us manner. 10% 2. Carries out various .courier functions by: - driving hospital owned or rented vehicles on grounds for delivery/collection of goods and equipment - collecting and/or delivering mail or parcels as required - picking-up and delivering emergency supplies such as drugs, CSR supplies, x-rays, patient fiies, etc, as required. 4. 5% 3. Other duties as assigned. As can be seen from the above, the emphasis in the summary of duties and responsibilities was placed upon the manual aspects of the Courier job, such as the movement of furniture or the distribution of reports. Mr. Couture disputed this assessment in his testimony. He stated :hat approximately three weeks before the hearing, he timed himself with a stop-watch for one day. 'The purpose of this effort, he explained, however, was not to determine the percentage of his entire time that he spent in the act of driving but to demon- strate the ratio between the amount of time he spent driving and the amount of time he spent making deliveries within each building. As a result, ti. Couture was unable to provide on behalf of the grievors an estimate of their total driving time. Moreover, Mr. Couture did not attempt to factor into any of his calculations, the amount of idle time that the Couriers spent in their office, waiting for calls. He stated that he did not believe that the amount of idle time that was spent in this rpanner should count against the Couriers, because it did not count against the Drivers . . at the Hospital, who already were classified in the classification of Motor Vehicle Operator 1 and who provided direct transportation needs such as transportation"of laundry, food, stores, and patients within and without the Hospital grounds. The Union did zot call any testin.0:y to indicate that the qrievors were performing virtually identical duties to I. 5. other employees who also were classified in the classification of Motor Vehicle Operator 1. The 'only evidence which was entered in this regard consisted of two position specifications from other location: which indicated, the Union submitted, that other persons performing substantially similar work had been classified as Motor Vehicle Operators 1. The first of these position specifications was for a Driver Messenger for the Ministry of Cons%umer and Com- mercial Relations: The duties and responsibilities which.were contained in its summary were as follows: 1. Performs a driver and delivery service to Ministry by: - collecting, sorting and delivering mail, office supplies, etc. including confidential material, to and from Ministry offices in the Toronto area on a set daily route within a tight time schedule; obtaining acknowiedgement receipts for some documents as required: 95% - making special/urgent d.elivery or pick-up as directed; - assuming full responsibility while operating the vehicle, by observing alLsafety precautions and traffic regulations; - maintaining the general appearance and cperating condition of the mailroom vehicle; - arranging necessary repairs and servicing of the vehicle: 2. Performs related duties such as: - assisting supervisor in sorting and bagging outgoing mail; 5% - metering outgoing Canada Post Mail when time permits;~ - as assigned. 6. The second position specification was for a D:iver and Maintenance Worker for the Regional Public Health Laboratory of the Ministry of Health. Its s'ummary of duties and responsibilities read as follows: 1. Performs drive: and courier functions, Such as: 80% - picks up mail and specimens from post office - delivers laboratory reports to physician's offices, clinics #health units, and picks up speczmens for laboratory testing - delivers diagnostic outfits. 2. Performs other related duties as assigned, such as: 20% - arranges for maintenance of laboratory vehicle - security of building - opens laboratory and locks up at 4:30 p.m. (ensuring safety of building), as assigned. - receives and signs for stock shipments, opening parceis, checking packing slip to ccntents, placing items on shelves. - assembles diagnostic outfits, as required. - fills orders fcr diagnostic outfits. - assists in glassware and/or media preparaticn, as required. - removes snow at entracceways, as reguired. Again, no direct testimcny was entered to show the duties which ,. were actually performed by any pe:son in either cf the above pcsitions. At the hearing, both parties appeared to agree with respect to the general principles which ought to be applied in I evaluating a claim for a 2ifferer.t classificaticn. It was corzon ground between the parties that if the claim of the grievers was based U?Or. 2 "-,eper" evalcaticz cf Che ciassificsricns ~__ - ‘7. of Manual Ir!orker and Motor Vehicle Operator 1, it was incurhent u?on the Trievors to prove two things: First, that they were improperly classified in the classificatzon of..Fanual P7orker; and, secondly, that'they performed the central core cf duties of the claimed classification of Eotor Vehicle Operator 1. See generally, the authorities reviewed in Re Brick & Ministry of Transpo~rtation land C'ommuriica~tions (1982) , C-.S .9. 564/90 (Samuelsl. It certainly appears that this kind of "paper"evaluation is the only one which is before the Board in the present case. The two position specifications which were directed t.award makinc a comparison of the duties pe,- -+ormed by the grievors with those' of others already classified as Motor'Vehicle-Operators 1, must ~.~ be regarded as insufficient to support any conclusions in this regard. Unembellished by testimony as to duties actually being performed, these position specifications cannot.support important, and p,erhaps far-reaching, decisions in the classification area P?e turn, then, to the first question: whether it was proven that the grievors were improperly ciassified in the classification of Manual Worker. This classification reads as follows: - 0. CLASS DEFINITION: Employees in positions in this class perform a variety of unskilied manual tasks assisting technicians, tradesmen, maintenance, agricultural, highway or forestry workers in routine assignments, In most positions, their duties involve considerable physical effort and are closely supervised. In some positions their tasks are so repetitive as to receive only general review. In o:hers, they may be training o0s::ior.s for more technical duties. The duties of these positions and their immediate supervision are indicative cf the work areas in which they: are performed:- In some positions, in a maintenance area, these employees shovel and spread coal and operate a conveyor; collect and burn garbage and refuse and clean and service an incinerator: remove waste at a sewage pumping station and clean water tanks; clean combustion chambers and tubes in a boiler room; remove paint or wallpaper and wash and prepare walls for painting. In other positions, in a supply and construction area, these employees unload and stockpile construction materials: operate hand trucks: shovel gravel and mix mortar; dig and break cement; remove toois, machines, equipment, supplFes and furniture: erect building forms and scaffoiding. In other positions, in a forestry or landscaping area, these employees assist in weedinq, hoeing,.trans- planting, packing and shipping young trees; cutting brush and firewood, trimminq trees aad clearing underbrush. They may be required to service 2ar.4 comfort stations or occasionally operate a truck or tractor to clec: snow or underbrush or pick up and deliver freight. . In other positions in an agricultural area, these employees, plant, cultivate and maintain flower gardens, lawns and hedges: feed and tend animals and poultry; clean cages, barns and equipment; load and deliver milk, food suppLies, farm produce etc. In other positions, in a highway maintenance area, these employees dig ditches, clear culverts, shovei snow, sand, gravel, hot and cold bituminous mixes: maintain guide posts by replacing, painting, attaching cables: diq post holes by hand shovel or power-operated post-hole diqcer; cut and trim trees and grass using power operated chain saw, hand saws, hand or snail pcwer c~era:ecl xowers, scyzkes~ cperace ._ ,.-- -1. 9. 1. Elementary school education. 2. Some working experience with labouring tools. 3. Ability to follow simple instructions: willingness to co-operate: good physical condition. 4. When operating Department of Highway's equipment must possess current chauffeur's licence and ?ass 'Department operational and safety tests. It was submitted on behalf of the grievors that the definition in this classification did notembrace the job of the grievors a't all, particularly with respect to the type of work performed and the type of supervision which was given. It was stressed-that the grievors did not assist .any more highly skilled persons in their assignments, nor did the& duties, in the main, involve considerable physical effort. Moreoever, it was stressed that the examples set forth in the Manual Work,er classification highlighted this difference, in that the.y related to persons in Maintenance, Construction, Forestry and Agriculture -- all areas which were very different from that of the.qrievors. ' The Board, however, feels compelled to accept the submissions of the Ministry upon this poi%t. These submissions were that the Manual.Worker classification was wide-open, in the sense that unless a positionswere specifically excluded therefrom, it was "fair,game" for that classification. ,It was stressed that the examples,given within the classification were not exclusive. Moreover, the jobs of the grievors did fit, it Gas submitted, in the sense that they were routine and repetitive as called for by . :i ..-- -A r-rrn rl *Ia M?i.Tll.l Worker 10. classification did, in broad terms, embrace persons operating vehicles up to 39% of the time. Finally, it must be observed that even if the Board might have concluded otherwise on the question whether the qrievors we:e successful in shcwing that their existing classification was improper, it would not be possible, on the evidence, to conclude that they were successful in showing that they performed the core of the duties assigned to the classification o f Mctor Vehicle.Operator 1. The class standard for this classification reads as follows: MOTOR VERICLE OPERATOR 1 Characteristic Duties: They transport goods such as mail, office equipment and furniture, plants and construction materials, stock and automotive parts, lab specimens and chemicals. They also load and unload vehicles and may be assisted by assigned helpers. In other positions, they carry passengers, either on a full-time basis, or in combination with the t:ar.s- porting of goods and materials. Passengers may include residents or inmates beinq transported from institutional facilities to hospitals, other institutions, medical/ dental appointments, recreational outings, etc., who are usually accompanied by *tendants, counsellors or correctional officers. These employees may also transport passengers such as helpers, small work parties and senior ministry officials. Employees in all positions are responsible for ensuring that routine maintenance, e.g. oil, tire, pressure, brakes, is carried out on their vehicle(s) in order to maintain the safety of vehicles, passengers and cargo. They also maintain accurate records of miintenance and costs, pick-ups and deliveries, etc. Skills and Knowledce: A minimum of a Class "C" Ontario Driver's Licence 11. may be required. A working knowledge of the Highway Traffic Act. Good driving skills and safe driving record. Good physical condition.. NOTE: Excluded from this group are positions involving the operation of heavy duty vehicles, such as highway maintenance and construction' equipment. Such positions are covered by other classification series. There can be little doubt that the "core" duties of this classification involve driving a motor vehicle. On the evidence, the core of the duties of the grievors must be regarded as otherwise. The position specification for the position of Courier indicated that 85% of the duties involved manual functions. Mr. Holland testified that providing various manual courier services was the purpose of the job, with the use of a motor vehicle being only incidental thereto. The evidence' ?iven by Mr. Couture regarding the ratio of in-car to in-building time.was insufficient to show othe-wiise. It related.solely to one day, and not the entire five-week cycle. Moreover, the evidence was not adapted to indicate for the benefit of the Board the amount of: t&me actually spent driving. ?-ccordingly, on this record, the Board has no alternative but to conclude that the purpo~se of then courier job is the one described by t-9. Bolland. This, of course, takes the job outside the core of duties belonging to the classification of Motor vehicle Operator 1. The grievances are dismissed. 12. DATED at London, Ontario, this 17th day of July, Vice C+airman Member