The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986-0088.Moore.88-07-04IN THE HATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EKPMTEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLFJIENT BOARD (R. Moore) The Crow (Ministry of Trar Before: .I. ForbeE I.J. Thon W.A. Lob1 For the Grievor: C. Dassic Counsel Gowling i Barristex For the Employer: M.B. Fur: l-la Staff Rel tions Advisor Ministry f Transportation & Communications July 29, I TELEPHONE 4181598-0688 0088/86. Grievor ortation & Communications) Employer Roberts Vice-Chairman on Member ice Member d Henderson and Solicitors 987 DECISION This grievance relates to job competition N.W.R.-66-01 in the Ministry of Transportation and Communications (“the. Employer”). It vas a Ministry vide competition for the position of Accounting SectionUnit Supervisor head-quartered in Sault Ste. Marie , Six (6) candidates vere “short listed” fork interview. Amongst them vere the grievor, Mr. Robert Moore, and the successful candidate, Mr. Mark Forest. The latter vas duly notified of these proceed- ings and his attendant right to participate. At the time of the competition the grievor occupied the position of Clerk 4 General in the Employer's Sudbury office and had substantially more seniority than the successful candidate. The successful candidate occupied the position of Clerk 3 in the Sault Ste. Marie office. Article 4.3 of the collective agreement states: In filling a vacancy, the Employer shall give primary consideration to qualifications and a- bility to perform the required duties. Where qualifications and ability are relatively.equal, length of continuous service shall be a consi- deration. The competition vas duly conducted. The Union did not contend that this actual process vas flaved in such a fashion as to negate its results. Ultimately the successful candidate achieved an overall score of 311.1 points and the grievor came in second vith 269.4, points, a spread of 41.7 points. The Union argued that in spite of the point spread the grievor had nevertheless established himself as being qualified and able to perform the required had established his relative candidate, and his superior senior appropriate consideration. The Employer's position vas the grievor had not established hi duties. At the very u he equality vith the successful ity had not therefore received straight forvard. In its viev s qualifications and ability to perform the reauired duties. (emphasis added). He had also not established his relaive equality with the successful candidate and therefore seniority is not a consideration. It serves no purpose to recite the multiple days' vorth of evidence heard in this case. The nub of the case is as follovs. The second listed item under the "Candidate Must Have" section of the job posting is a "good vorking knovledge of O.M.S. computer functions". The Union alledged that the grievor had this. The Employer took the position that this vas a & element of the position and the grievor had only a sketchy knovledge vhich rendered him incapable of performing the job. An employer is not entitled to manipulate the qualifications for a posted job such as to ensure that only one (predetermined) applicant vi11 qualify. Hovever barring such bad faith manoveur- ing an Employer k entitled to determine vhat are key qualifica- tions for a position. There was no allegation of bad faith on this Employer's part, and we therefore accept the evidence of the Ministry witnesses that a "good vorking knovledge” of the O.M.S. -2- .computez functions vas a “must have” for the posted position. The issue becomes quite narrowly did the grievor ledge of this apparatus have knov- position, or at least vhich out and out qualified him for the rendered grievor’s body of knovledge? him relatively equal to the We vi11 start vith the application his O.M.S. computer experience forms . With respect to stated: on his application the grievor O.M.S. COMPUTER: Although~I have not spent that much time operating the computer, I am familiar vith its (sic) functions. Such as; run Begin day; our daily routine of entering batches ve vished transmitted to Dovnsviev; set up any report re- quests needed and End of Day; set up and enter Funding Work Orders. I garner various information from different computer reports vhile performing my Municipal duties. In his application form the successful applicant stated: I have vorked for close to tvo years directly vith the O.M.S. computer as the key punch operator. I have a very good understanding of its functions. I currently assist and replace the key operator vhen necessary. My major involvement vith the computer at this time is keying in all the equip- ment jobs and sign permit jobs. I am capable of compiling and entering nev report requests into the terminal as vell as requesting existing reports. Periodically I assist the computer branch in head office by telephone to search through various pro- grams for problems. I have also folloved through vith keying in variou;f;;z;n commands after Special outbounds from head ’ . When gyestions arX& concernina uro..w&res about the ww!Itar* ota wlovees still come to me for answers. The com- puter is a fascinating machine and is very interest- ing to, vork vith. (emphasis added) It must be born in mind that the posted job involved, amongst other duties, supervising the persons operating the computer. In oral testimony the grievor revealed that he had performed very limited functions on the computer, and indeed only vorked on it once a veek for betveen 5 and 15 minutes. Under cross- examination he agreed that he vould “definitely need training” to perform the posted job. An Employer vitness testified that the only reason the grievor reached the’interviev stage vas that as a Clerk 4 it vas assumed~ that he must have had more extensive experience on the O.M.S. computer than he wasstating in his application. , -3- Union Counsel argued that a “good vorking knovlede” of the O.W.S. computer did not call for a thorough knovledge. We agree vith that proposition. Hovever the phrase “good yq&L,ng knov- ledge” clearly prescribes a hands on knovledge. It is hard to imagine hov one can supervise a computer operator if one cannot operate the computer himself. It is apparent from both his job application and oral testimony that the grievor had very little experience vith the computer. His O.M.S. computer knovledge vas insufficient to meet the “qualifications and ability” require- ments of Article 4.3 of the collective agreement, and in the area of the computer he vas not relatively equal to the successful applicant. The grievance is hereby dismissed. We vould add by vay of obitpr that it is most unfortunate that the grievor had not been provided vith more extensive training on the computer. Unit Supervisor vould appear to be the next natural step in his career. One vonders hov he can progress vithout training on the computer. Dated at Toronto this 4th day of July , 1988. :Q--JAp-.~.. .__ - J. Forbes-Roberts Vice-Chairman