Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-0584.Union.unknown Decision180 DWMS sram wsr. TORONTO. o.wmo. MS IZE -SUITE 2100 BETWEEN : BEFORE : IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT BEFORE THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD OPSEU (Union Grievance) - And - THE CROWN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO (Ministry of Health) I. Springate Vice-chairman F. Taylor Member L. Turtle Member , FOR THE GRIEVOR: M. Cornish Counsel Cornish and Associates Barristers and Solicitors FOR THE EMPLOYER: P. Jarvis Counsel Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie Barristers and Solicitors HEARINGS : March 3, 4, 9, 11, 23, 24 and April 24, 27 and 30, 1987 TELEPHONE* 416/598- 0688 581184 Grievor Employe 1: INTERIM DECISION -1- This award deals with a procedural issue only, namely whether the Board should give any weight to the results of a survey of the views of bargaining unit enployees as well as a statistical analysis of those results. When counsel for the union first indicated that she would be seeking to rely on the survey results and the analysis, counsel for the enployer objected to their introduction on the grounds that the mterial was a form of written hearsay. Union counsel then indicated that she intended to call a number of expert witnesses for the purpose of establishing that both the results of the survey and the statistical analysis were scientifically reliable and hence should be accepted and relied on by the Board. The Baard ruled that it wauld hear fran the union's expert witnesses prior to deciding the issue. In the mrse of hearing fran those witnesses, the Board determined that a proper understanding of their evidence required that the Board have before it the survey questions, the results of the survey, and the report of the statistical analysis performed on those results. The Board accordingly admitted the mterial in question into evidence. This left outstanding only the question of whether the E3oard should give the mterial any weight. Having regard to counsels' advice that the Board's determination of this issue wculd likely influence the nature of the additional evidence the parties might wish to call, the Board indicated that it would release an interim award dealing with the mtter prior to the resunption of the hearing . -2- These proceedings relate to enployees of the Ministry of Health employed in the OHIP offices in Hamilton. The union contends that as a result of various deficiencies in the working conditions at Hamilton, the enployer is in breach of Article 18.1 of the collective agreement, which provides as follows: The Enployer shall continue to make reasonable provisions for the safety and health of its employees during the hours of their enployment. It is agreed that both the Employer and the Union shall co-operate to the fullest extent possible in the prevention of accidents and in the reasonable promotion of safety and health of all employees. A grievance filed by the union reads as follows: STATEMENT OF GRIEVANCE: The union grieves that the enployer is not making reasonable provision for the health and safety of its employees employed in the Ministry of Health, OHIP offices located at 119 King Street, Hamilton, and is in violation of Article 18.1 of the working conditions/employee benefits collective agreement. SETTLEMENT REQUIRED: The union seeks the correction of those working conditions that are currently contributing to the ill-health experienced by employees. the following: 1. improved air quality. 2. abatement of noise levels. 3. provision of properly designed off ice equipment (a ) adjustable desks for VDT use -provided with split table surfaces that can be adjusted independently; (b) appropriately designed hard copy holders; (c) easily adjustable chairs that can be adjusted safety and easily fran a seated position. 4. the provision of a properly designed lighting system. 5. the provision of anti-glare, antistatic screen filters; the abolishment of the current quota system and electronic monitoring practices. These include -3- Although the enployer has not yet called any evidence, from the nature of the cross examination of union witnesses by employer counsel, we gather that the employer acknowledges that at times employees have been required to work under conditions of discomfort due to poor air circulation. It is clear, however, that the parties disagree as to the extent of the problem and whether it involves a health and safety issue. The parties also disagree as to certain of the facts relevant to the other matters referred to in the grievance and whether those matters involve health and safety concerns. It follows that the Board will be called upon to make a number of findings of fact as to actual employee working conditions and whether those working conditions adversely inpact on the health and safety of enployees. The union has not yet led all of its evidence with respect to the merits of the grievance. It has, however, called a number of enployees to give first hand evidence as to working conditions at the OHIP offices, including the quality of the air, air circulation, temperature levels, noise levels, lighting, and the various types of equipment that employees utilize. In the course of giving their evidence, these enployees referred to certain difficulties they encountered as a result of their working conditions and also referred to certain physical symptoms and medical conditions they attributed to those conditions. When cross-examining these employees, enployer -4- counsel questioned them as to the details of the working conditions they had referred to, the time span covered by their evidence, the frequency with which they encountered difficulties and the the effect of certain alterations to the work environment made by the enployer. Employer counsel also asked them questions relating to physical symptoms experienced by them away from the work place and any pre-existing medical problems. In that all of the employees testified prior to when union counsel raised the matter of the survey none of the employees were questioned concerning their responses to the survey questions. On agreement of the parties there were filed in evidence a number of reports prepared by officials of the Ministry of Labour following visits by them to the Hamilton OHIP offices. These reports include the results of several measuremnts taken at various locations at the OHIP offices relating to the amount of carbon dioxide, fomaldehyde and ozone in the air, wet bulb and dry bulb temperatures, relative humidity, noise levels, and illumination levels. We are also advised that the union is considering calling expert witnesses for the purpose of showing a causal relationship between employee working conditions and a number of health and safety concerns. It is in addition to this evidence that the union seeks to rely on the results of the survey and the analysis of those results. -5- The survey took the form of a questionnaire circulated by the union among employees in the bargaining unit. Of the approximately 180 employees in the bargaining unit, 145 completed the question- naire. The survey questions were prepared by Mr. Robert De Matteo, the union's Co-ordinator of Occupational Health and Safety. The answers to the questions were analyzed by Dr. Margaret Denton, President of Social Data Research Limited. Mr. De Matteo and Dr. Denton were called as witnesses by the union as was Dr. Michael Ornstein, the Associate Director of the Institute for Social Research at York University. We are satisfied, on the basis of the testimony of these three individuals, that the questions utilized in the survey questionnaire met the generally accepted social science criteria for use in a survey and that the analysis of the survey results was performed in accordance with recognized satistical methods for analyzing social science data. -6- Below are set out a number of key questions from the survey questionnaire: ( 20 IN YOUR PRIMARY WORK AREA (THAT IN WHICH YOU SPEND THE MOST TIME) Do YOU FEEL THERE IS: a) too little air movement? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes often or always b) too much air movement? (drafts) - 3 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes of ten or always - 3 c) lighting too bright? never or rarely - 1 2 sometimes of ten or always - 3 d) lighting too dim? never or rarely - 1 2 sometimes often or always - 3 e ) glare on work surf aces? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 often or always -7- f) unpleasant odors? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes of ten or always - 3 g) temperature too cold? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 - of ten or always h) temperature too hot? never or rarely sometimes of ten or always - 1 2 3 - - i) air too dry? 1 - never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 - of ten or always j) air too mist? 1 - never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 of ten or always k) air too smokey? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 often or always -8- 1) air too stuffy? 1 7 never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 - of ten or always m) air too dusty? 1 - never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 7 of ten or always (22) IF YOU WORK ON A VDT/CRT, ANSWER THIS QUESTION. FOLLOWING BOTHERSOME: a) flickering of screen? ARE THE 1 - never or rarely sometimes 2 3 of ten or always - b) brightness of screen? 1 - never or rarely sometimes 2 3 - of ten or always - c) height of screen? 1 never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 often or always -9- d) distance to screen? never or rarely - 1 - sometimes 2 of ten or always - 3 e) bright lights above or behind VDT/CRT? never or rarely - 1 sometimes - 2 3 - often or always f) size of lettering? 1 - never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 - often or always g) brightness of letters? 1 - never or rarely 2 sometimes 3 7 often or always h) height of keyboard? never or rarely - 1 2 sometimes 3 - of ten or always i) distance to keyboard? never or rarely - 1 2 sometimes often or always 7 3 - 10 - j ) reflections? never or rarely _ 1 2 sometimes 3 - often or always k) is the keyboard attached? - Yes 1 2 no - (29) HAVE YOU EVER EXPERIENCED ANY OF THE SYMPTOMS LISTED BELOW WHILE AT WORK? (CHOOSE ALL THAT APPLY). a ) headache once a month or less - 1 2 once a week once a week or more - 3 b) dizziness 1 - once a month or less 2 once a week once a week or more - 3 c) fatigue once a month or less - 1 2 once a week once a week or more - 3 d ) sleepiness 1 - once a month or less 2 once a week once a week or more - 3