Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-0575.Amos et al.91-01-14~, :i; ~i~'~ ' a ONTARIO EMPLOY~SOELA COURONNE .... · ' ' CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L'ONTARtO BOARD DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2100, TORONTO, ONTARK1 MSG 1Z8 TELEPHONE/T~'LE.~OIVE,~ (4 ~6) $26- 1388 180, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, BUREAU 2100, TORONTO {ONTARIOJ. M5G 1Z8 FACS/MfLE/T~L~COPiE ; (476) 325- 575/88 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION : Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVkNCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN OPSEU (Amos et al) Grievor - and- The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Health) Employer BEFORE: B. Keller Vice-Chairperson P. Klym Member I. Cowan Member FOR THE R. Wells GRIEVOR Counsel Gowling, Strathy & Henderson Barristers & Solicitors FOR THE D. Costen EMPLOYER Counsel Human Resources Secretariat Management Board of Cabinet HEARING: December 7, 1989 November 21, 1990 December 4, 1990 DECISION The grievors seek to have their positions reclassified. Six are currently c~assified as Industrial Officer 1 (Atypical) - (I.O. 1). They seek a Berry£type order. The remaining two grievors are currengly classified as Industrial Officer 1 (Atypical). This decision deals only with the 1.0. i grievances, the parties having agreed that the I.O. 2 grievances would be heard, if required, ~ollowing the issuance of this~decision. The grievors are all employed as work instructors in the vocational services division at the Oakridge facility of the Ministry in Penetanguishene. The followihg position specification was agreed by the grievors to be generally accurate: To supervise and instruct patients performing work in various workshops and/or hospital service areas of Oak Ridge maximum security facility while maintaining a maximum level of safety and security. To provide ongoing reports and assessments of work habits and behaviour of patient workers. Duties and related tasks (what is employee required to do, how and why? Indicate percentage of time spent on each duty) Ensures maintenance of therapeutic asDects of work Droqrammes by: - assessing, ev.aluating, instructing and supervising patients in various work areas; - explaining requirements and details of work to be performed; - assessing of work performed (quality control); - teaching patients good work habits and appropriate work behaviors in various work areas; 5% - teaching patients safety rules of assigned work area; - frequent monitoring of each patient in the various work areas, including work habits, stability~ attitudes toward fellow workers and staff; - reporting and recording changes in a patient's behavior in the work area; - recording patient progress on the clinical file with reference to patient treatment plan; - diScussing.progress with assigned patients, i.e., ,explaining evaluations; - teaching proper use of tools and materials to patient workers. Ensures maintenance of a maximum level of safety and security by: - carrying out on-going security checks of patients and areas assigned; - supervising patients known to be capable of harming themselves or others; 15% - frequent checking of tools and equipment in use, accounting .for same at alltimes and ensuring thei~ return at the end of the work period; - using discretion when handing out tools or assigning equipment being certain patient is capable and stable enough to handle same (e.g. sharp chisels, saws, scissors, drills, knives, hammers, .air guns, toxic materials, glue thinners, paint remover, caustic solutions) which, if wrongly used, could be lethal weapons (to harm himself or others); - supervising patient movement from wards 'to work areas and back, and to various other related areas throughout the hospital; **Incumbents maintain security vigilance 100% of their time. In this position, the 15% time allocations should not mislead or underscore the extreme importance of this key duty. Assists with the settinq up and oDerati@n of work programmes by: - discussing production schedules and methods for each job, planning work layout and assignments according to available patient manpower and production demands; 15% - issuing tools and materials to various work groups at the commencement of each work period and receiving the same back at the end of each period; - maintaining all tools and equipment in good working order to ensure ease of handling and safety of workers; - maintaining production figures (units produced, materials used, etc.) on work performed. Maintain liaison with other staff by: - maintaining close communications with fellow workers, supervisor.and other staff when appropriate in dealing with problems/issues related to patient cure.and workshop operations; 15% - meeting regularly with supervisor and fellow workers and/or other staff to discuss patient progress, therapeutic value of various work activities, programme changes, safety and security, etc. Performs related duties such as: 5% - assisting attendant staff in providing programmes and security in other areas of the 'hospital as directed (i.e. 3/4 hour daily dining room supervision, or supervising recreational activities as required); - other related duties as assigned. We classified this position in accordance with the Civil Service Commission Classification Standards for the following reason: Responsible for providing supervision and instruction to patients performing work in various workshops. Work performed in a maximum security facility maintaining safety and security. Perform' ongoing assessment and reports of patients~ w~rk habits and behaviour. The Class Standard which applies is: INDUSTRIAL OFFICER 1 CLASS DEFINITION: Employees in positions allocated to this class instruct and direct an assigned group of inmates in the processing in volume of various products, food, clothing and maintenance supplies at reformatories and industrial farms. These duties do not require skills to the level of the designated trades. They share responsibility with their supervisors, and with any custodial officers assigned, for the security and work performance of inmate helpers. They ensure the observance of safety precautions, demonstrate methods, and assist in maintaining quality control and in meeting production schedules. They submit reports on any irregularities and make recommendations for changes in routine or for disciplinary action. They ensure the proper use of equipment and direct and assist in necessary repairs. In most positions they participate in all operations supervised in order to demonstrate and maintain reasonable work standards. OUALIFICATIONS: 1. Grade 8 education, preferably Grade 10; practical knowledge of skills related to the work to be performed. 2. Two years of satisfactory related experience, part of which may have been on custodial duties. 3. Supervisory and instructional ability related to'the kind of work to be performed; ability to deal effectively with inmates; ability to assess standards of inmates' industry and conduct. A more complete explanation of the functions of the grievors was given by 3 of them. Mr. Kenneth T. Popple, Director Vocational and Recreation Services in response to a question from his counsel, acknowledged the characterization of the grievors' to be accurate. The grievors currently work in the vocational work shops at the institution~ The six are inter-changeable and have occasion to work in each of the shops. It was agreed that the principle aim of some of the shops, such as woodworking, has changed over the years. At some time in the past, production - both for the institution and outside customers - was a main goal. Over the last number of years production has become a non-issue. The principle ro~e of the shops and the grievors is the treatment of patients with the specific goal of preparing the patients to be reintegrated into the community at the highest working level possible. Before a patient is accepted to work in the shops an assessment is performed by an I.O. 1. There are specific criteria, some of which are objective and others which call for a subjective determination by the assessor. Following this initial assessment the I.O. 1 decides whether a patient can enter the program or not. There is a patient appeal if refused but no decision of an I.O. 1 has yet been reversed. Once accepted into the program, the patient goes through an assessment phase, for which an I.O. 1 is responsible, prior to a specific tr~atment Plan being developed. The treatment plan is developed by a vocational counsellor partially based on the assessment done by the I.O. 1. The I.O. 1 reviews the plan and if there is any disagreement with it, "negotiates" changes to it with the vocational counsellor~ The treatment plan forms part of the total patient program. Once a treatment plan is developed, daily, weekly and monthly assessments of each patient are dohe by the I.O. 1. Each is designed to further the goals of the program. Within each shop the I.O. 1 has day-to-day responsibility for furthering the patients individual program. It is as a result of the assessment of the I.O. 1 that a patient's incentive pay is determined and also, ultimately, whether the plan should be modified and even whether a patient should remain in the program. It is within the ambit of the above that the various duties as outlined in;the position specification are performed. The union takes the position that the classification standard, developed ~in August 1963 has been over-taken by time. Specifically, it is argued that the production-oriented standard no longer accurately reflects the treatment and rehabilitation role now played by the I.O. Is. The employer argues that the standard is still an accurate reflection of the I.O. 1 duties. We are told that there are three main components to' the class standard - supervision, security, and reporting and assessing - and all the duties performed by I.O. ls are subsumed within them. The current role and duties as explained by the ioO. 1 - with which the employer concurred - establishes to the satisfaction of the Board that the 1963 standard is not a proper reflection of the real roles performed today by the grievors. There is, in fact, a substantial difference in the work actually performed and the characterization of the standard. This is not surprising and is explained by the change of emphasis in the shops from 'production ~o rehabilitation. It is only natural that the duties of the I.O. 1 similarly have changed to adapt' to the new direction and goals. In sum we are satisfied that the class standard does not reflect the realities of the job today. They are now partners in the clinical team of each patient. They play an integral role in the development of the treatment plan for each patient and their ongoing assessment. This is nowhere contemplated in the class standard and is what causes the grievance to succeed. By way of remedy, the grievors seek a "Berryitype'' award. Essentially this means that the current class standard into which the grievors have been put is not appropriate and that it is the responsibility of the employer to fit them into an apprcpriate standard or~ if necessary, develop one. In practice and fact, it is the latter which normally takes place. Concern h.as been expressed about this type or order. Particularly, the argument goes, a multiplicity of class standards are being generated each to some extent in isolation which has negative consequences on the integrity of the classification schema in general. It also makes administering the classification program difficult. It is hard to argue with the above concerns. -But the fact 'remains that employees have a' right to be properly classified. Improper classification almost inevitably costs an employee money. It also goes without saying that this Board has an adjudicative role to fulfill. That means that it must assess each grievance on its merits. Given the many, if not most class standards are many years old, and given the natural evolution of jobs, it is not surprising that the class standards no longer, in many cases, reflect the reality of the work place. So long as they don't it is likely that Berry-type orders will continue to issue. The resolution of the matter lies not with the Board, but ultimately with the parties. The grievances succeed. The employer is ordered to take the necessary ~teps to properly classify the I.O. is. They shall have 90 days from the issuance of this decision to do so. Should the employer have difficulty with the time period set out, it is to inform the union and the Board in writing within ten days of the issuance of this order, detailing its difficulties and specifying, in detail, a work plan and schedule in which it will fulfill the order. The union shall have ten days from that time to make its position known following which the Board will confirm or modify this order. Modification should.not be anticipated - until otherwise notified, the employer is to work towards the 90 day time limit. The Board remains seized to deal with any issue arising from the i implementation of this decision. Nepean tb~s lath day of January 1~91. M. Brian Keller, V±ce-Cha±~erson Peter Klym, Member I. Cowan, Member