HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-1287.Wu.90-07-18 ONTARIO EMF%OY~$ DE LA COURONNE
: CROWN EMPLOYEES DE {.'ONTARIO
GRIEVANCE C,OMMISSION DE
SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS
~80 DUNDAS STREET WEST, TORONTO, ONTARIO. MSG IZ8- SUITE 2100 TE£EPHONE/T~i.,~'PHONE
180. RUE DUNDAS OUEST, ToRONto. (ONTARIO) MSG IZe . BUREAU 2100 (418) 598.068,~
2
8
7
/
8
8
IN TIlE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
OPSEU (Wu)
Grievor
- and -
...The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Labour).
Emp loye r
- and -
J. Sammuels Vice-Chairperson
Z. Thomson Member
A. Merritt Member
FOR TIlE R. Healey
GKIEVOR Counsel
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
Barristers & Solicitors
FOR TIlE S. Sapin
EMPLOYER Staff Relations Officer
Ministry of Labour
nEARING: April 26, 1989
August 1, 1989
May 2, 1989
June 19, 26, 1990
2
Dr. Wu'is a scientist in the Ministry's Occupational Health
Laboratory in Weston. He is called a Development Scientist and he is
classified as a Scientist 3. He claims that he dught to be classified as a
Research Scientist 4.
The Laboratory is an important pan of the Ministry's occupational
health and safety program designed to protect workers from harmful
substances in the workplace. The Laboratory's principal function is' to
analyze samples taken from working environments to determine whether
these samples contain harmful substances.
As Dr. Wu's job description says (it is found as Appendix 1 to this
award), the purpose of his position is "to engage in middle to long:term
projects to devise, develop, modify, improve, set up and/or validate
methods to analyze samples for a wide variety of substances possibly found
in the working environment". In short, his job is to develop or validate the
methods by which' samples will be analyzed, rather than to do the analysis
itself.
Dr. Wu came to the Laboratory' in 1980 with a PhD in Photo-
organic Chemistry from McMaster University (1973), post-doctoral work
at the University of Toronto, and work experience with the Federal
Department of Agriculture,
The Occupational Health Laboratory has about 40 employees under
the general direction of Dr. M. Nazar. It has four sections, each involved
in a different form of sample analysis,--Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy,
for the analysis of biological samples, such as the detection of heavy metal
in urine and blood; Emission and Infrared Spectroscopy, for the analysis of
samples taken from industrial sites; Electro Microspectroscopy, for the
detection of dust, asbestos and silicones; and Chromatography, for the
analysis of air and biological samples by chromatographic means.
After joining the staff at the Laboratory, Dr. Wu worked first in the
Emission and Infrared Spectroscopy Section, analyzing samples, and then
developing a means for the determination of nitrites in metal-cutting fluids
by gas and ion chromatography. He was classified as a Scientist 2. From
September 1982 to April 1983, he moved to the Atomic Absorption
Spectroscopy Section as the Senior Scientist, a management position.
Wishing to.do more research, he left his Senior Scientist position in April
.1983, and became the Development Scientist in the Chromatography
Section, classified as a Scientist 2 until December 1986, and thereafter
classified as a Scientist 3. The Senior Scientist in this Section is Dr. V. S.
Gaind.
Since April 1983, Dr. Wu's work has largely been as described in
the job description appended to this award as Appendix 1. Most of his
efforts have been devoted to the development of new and better methods
for the detection of monomeric and polymeric isocyanates. Isocyanates are
found in many compounds, such as spray paint and polyurethane. When
released into the working environment, they cause s~rious allergic .and
respiratory problems, including asthma.
Dr. Wu's most significant work has been concerned with "total
isocyanate determination" that is, a method which will detect all
isocyanates in a sample. This work has led to the introdUction of a
detection method which uses tryptamine as a derivatizing agent, followed
by fluorescent and amperometric analysis by means of high-performance
liquid chromatography. The.isocyanate is derivatized with tryptamine.
The derivative is then subjected to reversed-phase high-performance liquid
chromatographic separation using tv~o means of detection, fluorescence and
amperometric oxidation. This "dual detection" is intended to provide
Confirmation of the presence of isocyanates.
There are two elements of Dr. Wu's method which are significant
innovations. Firstly, his use of tryptamine as a derivatizing agent.
Secondly, his use of fluorescence as one of the means of detection. Up
until his work, the primary means of detection was by means of ultraviolet
4
light, a method developed and used in the United Kingdom. Dr. Wu's
theory is that fluorescent light is a better detector than ultraviolet light.
This work on isocyanates went on for a long time, and involved the
application of the detection model to various polymers and using various
methods of trapping the isocyanates. It is now over, at least for the time
· being, it resulted in a number of presentations' and publications.
In October 1985, Dr. Wu submitted an abstract to the 1986
Pittsburgh Conference on Analytical Chemistry and Applied Spectroscopy,
entitled "Dual Detection of Airborne Isocyanates--A Model of Using
Tryptamine as New Derivatizing Agent". As a result of this, he was asked
to provide a brief report of his work for the Industrial Hygiene News
Report, which appeared in March 1986.
In March 1987, Dr. NaZar, the Chief Scientist at the Laboratory,
attended the annual conference of the British OccUpational Hygiene Society,
and presented a paper largely prepared by Dr. Wu, concerning the
isocyanate work. It was very well.received.
In June 1987, the Analyst, a highly respected British journal
published by the Royal Chemical Society, published Part 1 of Dr. Wu's
study on the use of tryptamine and dual detection. The overall title of the
studY was "Application of Tryptamine as a Derivatising Agent for
Airborne Isocyanate Determination", and Part 1 was entitled "Model of
Derivatisation of Methyl Isocyanate Characterised by Fluorescence and
Amperometric Detection in High-performance Liquid Chromatography".
This paper had been presented in part at the 37th Pittsburgh Conference
and Exposition on Analytical Chemistry and Applied Spectroscopy.
In August I988, the Analyst published Part 2 of the study, entitled
"Dual function of Tryptamine for Calibration and Derivatisation of
Poly[methylene (po!yphenyl isocyanate)] for Quantification by High-
performance Liquid Chromatography".
In 1990, about a year and a half after the grievance was filed, the
Analyst published Part 3 of the study, entitled "Evaluation of Total
Isocyanates Analysis by High-performance Liquid Chromatography with
Fluorescence and Amperometric Detection". The work leading to this
publication was done in the period 1984 to 1989.
Part 4 may be published in the future. It is entitled "Evaluation of
Major High-performance Liquid Chromatographic Methods Regarding
Airborne Isocyanate Analysis with Specific Investigation on Competitive
Rate of Derivatization".
Other work by Dr. Wu has led to several presentations and brief'
publications dealing with the determination of nitrites in metal-cutting
fluids, by gas chromatography, the determination of isophorone
diisocyanate in air by high-performance liquid chromatography, and the
analysis of p-toluene sulfonyl isocyanate using dual detectors.
In all, up to the time of the grievance, Dr. Wu' had 'produced about
12 presentations and brief publications since 1981. In that time, he had
four published papers (by the time of this decision, with the addition of
Part 3 of the isocyanate study, he has had five published papers). He does
not teach (though he once taught chromatography as part of a course at
Ryerson); he has limited contact with experts outside his Laboratory; he
has done minimal editing and review work for publications. He has not
received any awards for his work.
What is the value of Dr. Wu's work among his peers?
Over the years, he has had a handful of enquiries concerning his
work, and .he has been asked for thirty to forty copies of reprints of his
papers and articles. Dr. Wu had no evidence that his work had been
mentioned favorably in the writing.s of others. He has never been asked to
preside over a panel.
6
Dr. Gaind, the Senior Scientist in the Chromatography Section at the
Laboratory, feels that Dr. Wu's use of tryptamine as a derivatizing agent
and the system of dual detection provides excellent reliability and is now
the best method for practical use. (Note: The Regulation respecting
Isocyanates, made under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, still
provides for detection of isocyanates by the "nitro" method.)
Dr. F, Eady, the Director of the Ontario Horticultural Research
Institute, and a member of the Research Scientist Advisory Committee
which was asked to consider whether Dr. Wu should be a Research
Scientist (we will discuss the Class Series for Research Scientist, and the
role of this Committee, in a moment), after considering Dr. Wu's
publication record and research, testified that, in his view, Dr. Wu had not
demonstrated research productivity which would have enabled him to
achieve recognition by scientists in his own and allied fields as an authority
in his field of specialization. In particular, he pointed to the fact that Dr.
Wu had published very little in publications subjected to peer review. This
view was also the unanimous view of the Committee.
Dr. P. Shepson, a Professor of Chemistry at York University and
Acting Director of the Centre for Atmospheric Chemistry at York, has
been involved for many years in the develOpment of methods to measure
· toxic pollutants in air. In general terms, this is the same field of enquiry as
Dr. Wu's work. Dr. Shepson characterizes as "fairly clever" Dr. Wu's use-
of tryptamine and dual detection for the determination of total isocyanates.
Dr. Shepson says that this is new and is a contribution to the measurement
of isocyanates in air. However, having considered all four Parts of Dr.
Wu's work on the "Application of Tryptamine as a Derivatising Agent for
. Airborne Isocyanate Determination", Dr. Shepson was not satisfied that it
had been demonstrated that Dr. Wu's method would work adequately with
real samples from industrial settings. Furthermore, Dr. Shepson was of
the view that, with only four publications in peer review journals between .
1980 and 1989, Dr. Wu's "productivity" was relatively low. As well, Dr.
Wu's record showed few of the indicia which generally demonstrate
"esteem" among one's peers--a considerable publication record; invitations
to make presentations at universities, government bodies,, and other peer
gatherings;' invitations to edit journals, or other concrete demonstrations of
respect for one's work.
Dr. M. Nazar, the Chief Scientist of the Occupational Health
Laboratory (in other words, the manager of the Laboratory),. is not overly
impressed with Dr. Wu's work. In particular, he is not satisfied that Dr.
Wu's method for the detection of total isocyanates works, though the
reason for this dissatisfaction was not made clear to us at all in Dr. Nazar's
testimony. He referred to some report he received, of which he could
recollect few details and which was not produced for us.
Is Dr: Wu properly classified as a Scientist 3? And, if not, would he
be properly classified as a Research Scientist 4?
The Preamble to the Scientist Class Series and the Standard for
Scientist 3 are appended to this award as Appendix 2. And the General
Statement on the Research Scientist Series and the Standards for Research
Scientist 3 and 4 are appended to this award as Appendix 3.
An examination of the preliminary descriptions for each of these
Series reveals that there are two questions we have to answer. Firstly, does
Dr. Wu do "research" (in which case he ought to be classified within the
Research Scientist Series), or does he do "analytical laboratory work"
and/or "developmental work to improve analytical techniques" (in which
case he is properly classified in the Scientist Class Series)? Secondly, if he
does "research" and ought to be classified within' the Research Scientist
Series, What is the measure of "esteem" in which his work is held by senior
scientists in his field?
Why do we say that these are the two questions we have to answer?
8
With respect to the first question, the first three paragraphs of the
--. Preamble to the Scientist Class Series read:
KIND OF WORK COVERED:
These positions cover analytical laboratory work performed as a ser-
%'ice to the medical profession, law enforcement agencies, agriculture,
mining, industrial hygiene, other governmental agencies or the general pub-
lic. In some positions, developmental work to improve anal)~ical techniques
i's carried out. '
These positions may also exist in a research setting; in such case.s, in-
cumbents provide analytical services to research workers, without being sig-
nificantly involved in the setting of research objectives~ determination of
procedures and methods or in the evaluation and application of research data.
EXCLUS ION~:
1. Research positions, not involving analytical laboratory work provided
as a service, are to be considered for the Research $cientf~t class
series.
These three paragraphs draw a distinction between "analytical
laboratory work", "developmental work to improve analytical techniques"
and "research". The Scientist Class Series covers employees who do
"analytical laboratory work" and/or "developmental work to improve
analytical techniques". The third paragraph expressly excludes "research
positions" 'from the Scientist Class Series, and directs us to consider the
Research Scientist Series. For our purposes, the primary distinction to be
drawn is between "developmental work to improve analytical teck.'fiques"
and "research". What does each of these terms mean? And in which of
these activities is Dr. Wu engaged? ~
This distinction between the work of the Scientist and that of the
Research Scientist finds an echo in the Research Scientist Series. But first
we must say a word about a preliminary point raised in the opening words
of the General Statement to the Research Scientist Series.
In this General Statement, the opening sentence says that the Series
applies to "research work on problems pertinent to forestry, fisheries and
9
wildlife management involving the use of principles, methods and
techniques commonly accepted as constituting scientific method". On first
impression, it appears that the grievor could not be classified within this
Series because he does not work on problems "pertinent to forestry,
fisheries and wildlife". However, it appears that in practice this limitation
has not been employed in the classification of scientists as Research
Scientists. The Series is used for the classification of employees within and
outside the Ministry of Natural Resources (primarily the Ministry of the
Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food). The Series is
used if the employee is engaged in research generally, not~ only'on
problems "pertinent to forestry, fisheries and wildlife". In this vein, it is
important to notice that, in the Preamble to the Scientist Class Series,
"research positions" are excluded and then one is referred to the Research
Scientist Series, whatever the subject of the scientific research.
With respect to the difference between the work of the Scientist and
that of the Research Scientist, in the General Statement on the Research
Scientist Series, we find that the third exclusion from the Series is
Positions which entail the performance of work of
a professional but non-research character. This
may. involve the application of a body of known
principles and techniques to a variety of
problems, eg. silvicultural practices; diagn, ostic
work in health laboratories; mine assay work; etc.'
What is the distinction hetwe~en "developmental work to improve
analytical techniques" and "research"?
In our view, it is difficult to draw a sharp line between, these two
types of activity, because "developmental Work to improve analytical
techniques" will involve some "research" in the most general sense. But
something may be said concerning the differences in nature between
"developmental work to improve analytical techniques" and "research".
10
Firstly, "research" connotes a more rigorous study than
"developmental work to improve analytical techniques". The Shorter
Oxford English Dictionary defines "research" as "an investigation directed
to the discovery of some fact by careful study of a subject; a course of
critical or scientific inquiry".
Secondly, "research" cOnnotes a broader enquiry than
"developmental work to improve analytical techniques". The latter activity
involves a focus on existing analytical techniques, and work aimed at
developing improvements to these existing techniques~ As the third
exclusion in the Research Scientist Series says (quoted above), work of a
"professional but non-research character" involves "the application of a
· body of known principles and techniques to a variety of problems".
"Research" encompasses work which goes beyond-the development of
improvements to existing techniques and carries into the discovery of new
techniques altogether.
Thirdly, given the broader nature of "research" relative to
"developmental work to improve.analytical techniques", typically one
would expect that "research" would involve a more sustained program of
work, with more steps from beginning' to end of the project.
Given this background, the first question we have to answer is
does Dr. Wu do "research" (in which case he
ought to be classified within the Research Scientist ~
Series), or does he do "analytical laboratory
work" and/or "developmental work to improve
analytical techniques" (in which case he is
properly classified in the Scientist Class Series)?
With respect to the second questionmif he does "research" and ought
to be classified within the Research Scientist Series, what is the measure of
"esteem" in which his work is held by senior scientists in his field?Bit
arises from the instructions in the second last paragraph on the first page of
the General Statement on the Research Scientist Series:
11
For advancement beyond Research Scientist 2, the
: most important single criterion in assessing ability
and productivity is the esteem in which the work
of the researcher is held by senior scientists in his
field.
Then, to become a Research Scientist 3, the Standard for that level says at
'its conclusion:
For advancement to this grade, a Scientist shai1
have made a significant contribution and shall
have achieved recognition as a research worker in
a particular field.
And, to become a Research Scientist 4, the Standard for that level says at its
conclusion:
For' advancement to this grade, a Scientist shall
have achieved recognition by scientists in his own
and allied fields as an authority in his field of
specialization.
When it is proposed to classify an employee as a Research Scientist 3,
4 or 5, the employee's qualifications are submitted first to the Research
Scientist AdvisOry Committee for its recommendation. This Committee
consists of th'ree senior managers from research units in the three
ministries which are the primary employers of Research Scientists
Natural Resources, Environment,, and Agriculture and Food. The
Committee makes its recommendation according to established "Guidelines
on Series Usage". The original Guidelines and the Supplementary
Guidelines are aPpended to this award as Appendix 4. These documents, in
particular the Supplementary Guidelines, set out in detail the considerations
to be taken into account in assessing the candidate's level of "productivity"
and "recognition" for each level of Research Scientist. Though these
Guidelines are not formally part' of the Class Standards, in our view they
12
do provide an accurate~ amplification and clarification of the terms used in
the Standards.
Let us look now specifically at Dr. Wu's classification.
Is his work "analytical laboratory workl' and/or "developmental
work to improve analytical techniques" (in which case, he is properly
classified within the Scientist Class Series), or is he doing "research" (in
which case, he ought to be classified within the Research Scientist Series)?
It is clear that he is not simply doing "analytical laboratory work".
This is the work which is done generally in the Occupational Health
Laboratory. It is the service which is provided by the Laboratory the
analysis of samples taken from industrial settings in order to determine
whether the environment is safe for workers. Dr. Wu does not analyze
samples, except insofar as he does it in order to test his theories as he
works on the development of new and improved ways of measuring
harmful substances in samples.
Is it accurate to characterize Dr. Wu's work as "developmental work
to improve analytical techniques"? In our view, this is too narrow a term
to encompass what is required in Dr. Wu's position. Dr. WU does not
simply take existing analytical techniques and develop improvements..As -
counsel for the Union put it, Dr. Wu does not just "tinker" with existing
techniques in order to make them work better. Rather, as Dr. Wu's
Position Specification (Appendix 1 to this award) puts it, he is involved in
"middle to long-term projects", whi[h include devising new techniques
altogether (from the "Purpose of Position"). And, in fact, this 'has been his
primary work for some five years before he filed his grievance, as he
sought a method for total isocyanate determination. When Dr. Wu began
his work, there were methods for the determination of monomeric
isocyanates, but no satisfactory methods for the determination of the
presence and amount of polymeric isocyanates, and no method for the
:. 13
determination of all isocyanates ("total isocyanate determination") without
-" first determining each and every particular isocyanate present in the
sample. Though Dr. Wu's method for total isocyanate determination has
not yet been fully tested in the field, it appears from the testimony we
heard that he has devised a technique which, in three respects, is quite
new--it will determine if there are any isocyanates in the sample, whether
monomeric or polymeric isocyanates; it uses tryptamine as a derivatizing
age. nt; and it uses fluorescence as one of the methods of dual detection of
the isocyanates. In our view, this work went beyond "developmental work
to' improve analytical techniques" given the long-term nature of this
project, the broad purpose of the project (total determination of
isocyanates, rather than simply the determination of monomeric or
polymeric or any particular isocyanates), and the new ground broken, by
Dr. Wu in the achievement of his objectives. This was "research", as that
term is used in the Scientist Series and Research Scientist Series. Dr. Wu's
position is not properly classified in the Scientist Series. He ought to be
classified within the Research Scientist Series.
What level in the Research Scientist Series would be appropriate?
Normally, one moves up in a class series until' one finds an
appropriate level. So let us start with level 3.
The Research Sciefitist 3 is "responsible for a research program in a
special field of inquiry". In our view, this describes Dr. Wu's work. His
"special field of inquiry" will be assigned to him by his supervisors in the
Laboratory. Once the field of inquiry is defined, Dr. Wu is essentially on
his own. He plans the research program necessary to accomplish the global
objectives assigned to him. For example, he was asked to find a method
for the total determination of isocyanates, and he then embarked on a
multi-year program of research and testing over which he had almost total
14
control. He set the sub-objectives within the assignment. He planned how
to go about accomplishing these objectives. He carried out the work.
As it says in the second sentence of the Class Definition for RS 3, he
"may suggest to the supervisor problems within the general assignment,
plan approaches tO these problems, carry out research work, evaluate the
results, and prepare recommendations, reports and scientific papers". And
this is precisely what Dr. Wu does.
For Dr. Wu, as it says for the RS 3, "Supervision is general,
scientists being responsible for determining and developing methods and
procedures".
Dr. Wu has the educational qualifications required for RS 3.
He has the "Ability to carry out scientific research, to analyze and
interpret data, and to report results in an acceptable manner as
demonstrated by pu.blished scientific papers".
The RS 3 Standard concludes:
For advancement to this grade, a Scientist shall
have made a significant contribution and shah
have achieved recognition as a research worker in
a particular field.
Does Dr. Wu meet this requirement?
In our view, he does. And this was also the view of Dr. Eady, who
was a member of the Research Scientist Advisory Committee. 'From what
we heard from Dr. Eady, Dr. Shepsr>n, and Dr. Gaind, it appears that Dr.
Wu's work on the total determination of isocyanates, though not yet fully
field tested, is a "significant contribution". And this work has achieved a
good measure of recognition by virtue of the fact that Dr. Wu has
published three papers on it (two papers up to the time of the grievance) in
the Analyst, the most prestigious journal in the field in the United
Kingdom. In the "particular field" of isocyanate determination, Dr. Wu is
a recognized research worker.
15
From this review, we conclude that Dr. Wu would be appropriately
classified as a Research Scientist 3.
Would he fit at the 4 level? In our view he would not.
The Research Scientist 4 is a person with wid.__.~e contacts with peers--
"persons in their specialized field at universities, other research stations
and in industry in Canada and abroad". Dr. Wu does not have such
contacts.
The Research Scientist 4 has "achieved recognition by scientists in his
own and allied field~ as an authority in his field of specialization"
(emphasis added). We heai'd no evidence to show that Dr. Wu has achieved
this kind of recognition. There was no evidence whatsoever that he has
been recognized by scientists in allied fields. And, more importantly, there
was no evidence that he is recognized yet as "an authority in his field of
specialization". Dr. Wu suggested that this recognition has come in the
form of the roughly forty requests he has had for copie~ of his papers. But
these requests say absolutely nothing about, the regard with which the
requesters hold his work. They may simply be curious. They may read
his papers and think that they are trash. Or they may think that his work is
outstanding. We simply don't know. A far more important demonstration
of recognition would be if Dr. Wu's work was quoted or referred to with
approval by other scientists. But we had not one such reference. Dr. Wu
has not received invitations to speak at universities about his work (and
there are about five or six universities within a very short distance of the
laboratory). He has not been consulted in any significant way by peers.
In our view, Dr. Wu would not be appropriately classified as a
Research Scientist 4.
In conclusion, we find that Dr. Wu is not appropriately classified in
the Scientist Class Series, and that he ought to have been classified as a
Research Scientist 3. We order that he now be considered to have been
16
classified as a Research Scientist 3 as of 20 days before his grievance dated
November 25, 1988. He should be compensated for any difference in
salary, with interest at 10% per annum, compounded annually, on each'and
every sum from the date it ought to have been paid up to the date on which
it is paid.
We will remain seized to determine any matter arising out of this
Order. '
Done at London, Ontario, this lSth day of July , 1990.
J.L_W'2 Samuels, Vi'de,-Chairperson
I. Thomson, Member
A. Merritt, Member
Position Specificalion & Class Atlocalion-CSC 6
{Reler 1o back of form for complelion instructions)
For CSC
Development Scientist i 08-2550-57
Suue,~edes: Development SctentteC I 08-2550-57 Scientist 3 - 1~566
~abou~ Occ~pa~ona~ }]ea~h &
GranCh ~nd ~ec~ia, ~OcaClon ~o~. L~c.
ltealth & Safety Support Services-Lab, Serv. 101 Resources Rd'., WesSon, Ont. J 69501
2 No. OU=Osltio-s- I N~OI place, Senior Scien:~sL (ChromaLography) 08-2550-55
To engage ~n middle Co lot, g-term projects :~, develop, mod~fy,~~rove, set up and/or
wa~a:e mechods :o anatyze samples for a w~de variety of ~ubstances poss~bly found in the
~l~n~ env~ronmenE. Ia provide teclln~cal 8u~dance and advice to laboratory staff when
directed.
1. Pe~forms a var~eCy o~ duC~es ~n escabltslt~ng methods :o analy~e samples of subs:antes
possibly found ~n che wo~k~ng environment, by performing such tasks as:
-evalua~ng published l~teratute ~or poss~ble analytical methods su~Eable for
occupational hygiene mon~:ottng and determining su~tab~lity and p°ss~ble use;
-developing, modifying or ~mprov~ng such methods ~or use, where necessary;
- evalua:~n8 new analyCtcal techniques and procedures when required, aha advising of s~me
-dev~n8 and developing new techniques and procedures, when required, :o .:he degree
accuracy and precision necessary to accu:aCety assess worker exposure;
evaluating and ~terpret~n8 results of analyses to determine interferences, l~mita~on~
80Z accuracy and precision;
- ens'ur~ng proper and accurate records ate matnCa~ned for work performed;
- keeping abreast of relevant ne~ developmenCs ~n analytical chemistry;
- opt~mtzing the use o~ available instruments for effic~en: performance of analy:~cal
task~;
-advising supervisor on the modt[icaCton :o ex,sC, tn& equipment or the procurement of
i equipment Co carry DuC analyses; ~ ' ......... :" .....
-generally asst~ttng tn any area ~u th~ laboratory requiring tmmed{a:e assistance due tc
emergency, accident or unusually heavy workloads;
- :eporttnS, as o[Cen as required, au proEre~s and for overall gutdnnce on projects to
LaboraCo~y Research Comm~Ctee chatted by Chief, Occupat~o~nl llenlth Labo.ratory.or
destguate.
2. Ass[sCs Che Ohte[, Occupational HealCh Laboratory slid Senior Sc[enC~s~s.as required
- ma[nCatning equ~pmenC t~i good walking order, diagnosing'and correctin~ si~pl.e
IDZ faults;
- prepar[ns detailed methods and procedures developed, modt~ied, ~mproved or adap:ed for
s~T~_a.~5~.~3.; ............................. (Cant__. inued... )
4. Skilh and knowledge ~equi;ed ~o pe~lo~m job a~ ~ull wo~ki,g level, ll,,dica~ ma-dato,v c~e,len~ia~ o, ~icence~. i~
}lessers at Science degree with thesis from a university of recognized scandtnE with
on chemistry om an liOn,DUES Bache[o~ of Science from a university of recognized atand~n~
] emphasis on chemistry together with demonstrable research experience. Progressively
: ~.Rg. nS~l~per~_~3.C9 tn a laborato~3y._envtro,uqg. 9.%_- (Continued .,.)
Instructions for completing form CSC-6150
Use Ibis lo~m es indicaled below Ior all positions excepl those covered by the Executive Compensalion Plan, Management Compensation Plan or OUice
A~minlst~ etton Gcoup. ,.
Classified Full and Part-time posllions: Form to be compleled ~n ~ls enli~el¥.excepl lot Ihs Functional Code box in Seclion I.
Unclassified Seasonal Positions (Group 3): Complele Seclions I and 6 Ixcepl lei Ihs Funciional Code box in Section i. anc~ the evatua-
lion tallonate in Section 6.
All olher poslllons: Complelion of Ibis lorm in iull or as Set Out above lot Unclassihed Seasonal Posilions. is editorial.
InStrUctions lot coding Pos~li~n Identilter Snst,uclior~s Jot coding Seasonal Work Period
Code
(as applicable} Code I 2 3 4
Classified Posilio~s Seasons Wlnler Spring Summer Fall
end thei~ Oec. Mat. June Sel~.
Peri-lime 2
conseculive Jan. Apt, Jul Oct
Unclassilied Posilions order. Feb. May Aug. Nov. ,
Grou~ 3
a) Seasonal work period 8 conseculive : '"
~. weeks ~' mo~e bul less than 4 roe,Ihs 3 Build code as follows: ·:
~ b) Seasonal work pL~'iod 4 cons,,c~tive * Single season, i.e.. Spring Examples
monlhS or more but less Ihan 12 months
1. Indicale season, w~,e, [J s~,,-,e, IJ cod,,
Group 2 5
Other CrOwn 7' .
· Mulliple seasons, i.e. Summer,. Fall, Winler. :
Inslruclions for coding Sch. Hrs. Wo~k t. Indicale seasons· · ,
2. tnse~l code el stat1 .
Complele Ibis box lot R.P.T, Positions o~dy. season in lei'! hand box. w~r~e, ~ S~m, me/L~' cede~ -
nc~ude ix~ttions el hours I(~ 2 decimal i~laces. 3. Fottow wilh codes el
consecutive weeks by RP.T. e~'~pley-es a.esigned lC, a 13n~il~o~ seasons.
must coincide with ihs ,~,chedulad ~-tou~s Dt Work identiti~,d lot
IhSl position. Any change Io lite Scheduled Hours et Work will
tequi~e Ihs eslablishmenl end docu~nenlalion o! a separate NOIE: MuIliple seasons fnuSt be conseculive Io quahly as one posiliOn.
POSition.
Il:tee aha re'Iai:ed Casks (Cont.tnued) 08-2550-57
perform.inS'other speciality tests and .pro.}'ects as assigned.
[.,rforms other rela:ed duties such aa:
as
ass~.gnecl. : ,
ills and Knowledge (Cont./hued)
d in reel:hod development. Well-developed communicat'lon and interpersonal skills.
perience la tralning.~staf£ and knowledge of occupational hygiene.sampling and analyt:ical
emlstry Is desirable.
1~542 - 15550
SCIENTIST CLASS SERIES
.?
KIN~ OF WORK COVERED:
These positions cover analytical laboratory work performed as a ser-
vice to the medical profession, law enforcement agencies, agriculture,
mining, industrial hygiene, other governmental agencies or the general pub-
lic. In some.positions, developmental work to improve analytical techniques
is carried out.
These positions may also exist in a research setting; in such cases, in-
c~bents provide analytical services to research workers, without being' sig-
nificantly involved in the setting of research objectives~ deter~.ination of
procedures and methods or in the evaluation and application of research data.
EXCLUSIONS:
1. Research positions, no: involving analytical laboratory work Drovided
as a service, are to be considered for the Research Scientist class
series.
2. Positions involving technical laboratory work, not requiring university
training in a scientific discipline, are to be allocated to the Labora-
tory?~cknician class series.
3. Positions 'in en§ineering laboratories, where specialized analytical work
demands professional engineering qualifications, are to be allocated
· - the Engineer class series. "'
ALI~C~TION OF POSITIONS:
As described in the class specifications, this series covers a wide
variety of scientific laboratory work at various levels of complexity. The
allocation of a position usually depends not only on the technical complexity
of .the assigned duties, but on the level of scientific competence, independence
and authority at which these'are carried out.
The level is determined by factors such as the deKree of su~erris~on and
review of completed work by senior scientists, sqpervision of subordinate
scientific and technical staff and~he demonstrated 'accuracy and acceDtabili~'
9f anal~ica~ evaluat~a~-~inter~reta'tions. Other factors to be considered
include the dgzr~.~_gf_Du%.bo~.i-~-_W'ith~wh!.c-h["%~% inc~nbeq3 f3~r~sents the labora__-
.to~- or the Qe_~;_t~.3n~.~n his field' of specialization, the level and kind of
outside contacts and the authority which has been de!egated to~~ ~ncumbe-'~t
to commi~s organization in matters related to the scientific work performed.
In some cases, the level'of a position is strongly influenced by the factors
outlined above. A chan~e in incumbency may result in the re~radin~ of a ~o$itien.
Although the new employee would perform the same. kind of work, it is carried
out at a lower level of competency.
ghen new positions are established, or the upgrading of existing positions
is recommended, it is essential that these factors be closely examined, in
tion to the basic scientific and technical ~'omple×ity involved in the duties
- 2 - 15542 - 15550
ALLOCATION OF POSITIONS (Conrad)
assigned. The co-operation and assistance of senior scientific staff in the
clarification of these factors is vital to ensure proper allocations, and full
substantiating data should accompany such recommendations.
As the specifications show, this class series covers many different kinds
of scientific positions, and in each class small differences in level between
individual positions are unavoidable. In other words, "weak" and "strong"
positions may exist in the same class, without distortint the five basic levels
'of analytical scientific work performed in the service.
At)'pical or mixed positions, involving analytical services as well as
research work~ must be .analyzed in great detail to ascertain the appropriate
class series.
~ Well-established techniques and procedures governing the work in labora-
~tories handling a large ~olume of standard analyses ordinarily result in the
allocation of many positions to the Laboratory Technician series, and to the
cientist 1 and 2 clas~es.
Higher class levels usually involve consider-able supervisory respons'ibi!i-
ties; require individual initiative and originality in the selection, modifi-
cation and application of analytical methods and procedures; 'involve a large
variety of different kinds of complex specimens to be analy:ed and reported
on; regular appearances in courts of law to give evidence as a scientific ex-
pert of recognized standing and refutation; consultant and advisory services
to other agencies; other duties and responsibilities of a similar nature and
level.
November, 1961.
SCIENTI~T 3
C L.~$$ DEFINITION:
!
This is responsible scientific work performed in a provincial
~overnment laboratory. 'Employees personally conduct a variety of
complex tests, analyses and examinations, or they ma)- supervi.~e a
group of subordinate scientists and technicians performing a large
volume of standard analysis of moderate complexity. Scientists in
supervisory positions are responsible for the selection, use and
adaptation of appropriate techniques and procedures relating to the
work of their group, and are held responsible for the accuracy and
reliability of tile tests and analysis performed. General supervision
is received from a senior laboratory scientist.
CHAr~-\CTERISTIC DUTIES:
.per. form_c, omp!ex qualitative and ~uantitative laborato~- tests,
ana3ysis~.an~ examinagions~ using speciali:ed analytical~ procedures,
o[ten involving the skilled operation of complex and sensitive
a~paratus and equipment; evaluate and interpret spectrographic,
spectrophotometric, x-ray diffraction and other data.
Conduct spe¢iali=ed complex analytical and diagnostic studies., tests
and ~.~-iB'~'~ions in :he field of bacteriology~ biochemistry, chemistry,
toxicology, serolo~, virology, parasitology .amd mycolo~y;
,., toxic_iub~tance~., and air contaminants related to occupational health
'1 ~a:ards or crq~ and property damage.
· " ~amir, e and identify mineralogical samples by microscopic,
spectrographic, x-ray diffraction or chemical techniques.
Examine and analyme a wide variety of exhibits submitted by law en-
forcement agencies; appear in court as a fully oualified and ex-
perienced scientific witness; participate in ~he instruction of police
officers regarding the methods and techniques of forensic examination.
· Organi:e and conduct formal training courses for laborato~- technicians;
lecture on a variety of technical methods, techniques amd procedures;
prepare lecture material; conduct and set examinations, mark examination
papers.
-Supervise j~nior scientists and technicians performin~ stand~rd tests and
anaRysis; assign dutiesi formulate work flow; check test results and
analytical reports; maintain discipline.
?a. rticipate in developmental wdrk or special 'projects; may undertake
fie Ld surveys,
Prepare periodic reperts~ make recommendations, maintain necessarg' records
and supplies.
Perform other relate~ duties as req, ired.
QUALIFICATIONS:
1. A degree from a University of recogni:ed standing as for the
Scientist 1 class; preferably Masterts degree in the field
of specialization.
2. A minimum of five 'years of acceptable experience following
University graduation
an equivalent combination of post-graduate studies and
laboratory experience.
3. Thorough knowledge of laboratory methods, techniques and
procedures; abilit,- to carry out complex scientific assi~r~ents
ability to analyze, evaluate and interpret results of amai}~ical
examinations and special studies; accuracy; good judgnent.
NOTE:
~ Scientists holding doctorate degrees supplemented by
acceptable laboratory experience may be recruited in this class,
provided their duties and responsibilities will be commensurate
with the level of their academic qualifications and e.vperience~
subject to the approval of the Civil Service Commission.
Revised July 1965
* A GENEI~L ST^T~M~NT ON THE
~ RESF~%RCH SCIENTIST: NATURAL RESOURCES S~IES
A, Work Functions Covered:
This series applies to research work on problems pertinent to
forestry, fisheries and wildlife, management involving the use of
principles, methods and techniques con%monly accepted as constituting
scientific method. The Research Scientist is expected to p~ovide
fruitful theoretical insights and improvements in experimental
methods and techniques resulting in an expansion in the body of
knowledge constituting his special field.
Exclusions from this Series:
Excluded from this series are:-
SUpervisors in charge of major research establishments whose
work is primarily of an administrative character.
2. Supervisors who provide research leadership and carry ac~%ini-
strative responsibilities in connection w~th research work but
~lo do no't initiate and carr~ out their own research pro3e~ts
as a substantial and continuing activity.
3. Positions which entail the perfo~nce of work of a professional
but non-research character. This may involve the application of
a bod)r of known principles and techniques to a variety of problems,
e.g., silvicultural practices; diagnostic work in health labora-
tories; mine assay work~ et~. Such positions are allocated to r_he
appropriate professional series, e,~., Scientist~ Forester, Biologist,
whichever is applicable.
Class Distinctions Within the Series:
1. For advancement beyond Research Scientist ~, the most important
si.n~le criterion in assessi~ ability and productivity is the
esteem ia which the work of the researcher is held by' senior
scientists in his field. A detailed interpretation of the
, ,'equirement is .~tipu.]atcd in the qualifyin~ standards estab-
lished for the hi~her levels in the series.
2. Research Scientists are not required tO assume supervisory
~'esponsibi.[ities for a~vanccmemt in this series. However,
Scientists at the hi~her levels ma~v be expected to devote a
substantial portion of their tinle to providing research
leader.~h]p to junior scientists who are assigned limited
se&~ents of a major research pro3ect under cor~tinuous
supecvisiOno
15400-08
3.The i~ediate practical value derived fro~ research findings
is not a criterion in determining the relative worth of the
research being undertaken and is not considered in the {
classification of Research Scientists. The assessment of
the contribution for classification purposes is limited to
the demonstrated scientific competence of the Scientist with
relation to the scope of the research assignments undertaken.
4, Since scientific research is creative work which allows for
a ve~ wide span of productivity, qualifications and demon-
strated capabilities are given a prominent place in the
classification standards. The factors employed in classi-
fication ratings are the following:
i) the research assignment
ii) the nature and extent of supervision received
iii) originality in design and execution of research projects
iv) scientific leadership and recognized contributions
v) qualifications
Februar7, 196Z
Title Charu~e - October 3j 1971
_R 'ES E;dIGH SCIENTIST 3. NATURAL R'ESOURCES
CLASS DEFINITION:
Scientists at thi~ .[eve[ are responsible for a research pro~roJ~
in a special field of inquiry. They may suggest to the supervisor
problems within the general assignment, plan approaches to these
problems, carry out research work, evaluate the results, and prepare
recommendations, reports and scientific papers'. Supervision is
general) scientists being responsible for determining and developing
metkods and procedures. Plans and work-in-progress are reviewed
periodically with the supervisor, mainly for policy considerations,
and to arrange for staff, finances and facilities. Scientists super-
vise and train junior scientists and non-professional assistants, and
assess results of their work.
OUALIFICAT[ON$:
I. A Masterts degree from a un.iYersity of recognized standing in
· Forestry or Biology or other suitable fields of science, and
three years of acceptable experience in related research work;
or a Doctorts degree supported by significant research in a
particular field.
2. Ability to carry out scientific research~ to analyze and inter-
pret data, and to report results in an acceptable manner as
demonstrated by published scientific papers. For advancement
to this grade, a Scientist shall have made a significant
contribution and shall h~ve achieved recognition as a
research worker in a particular field.
Februa~-, 1962
Title Chan~e - October 3. 1971
RESEARCH SCIENTIST 4, NATURAL RESQURCF. S
CLASS DEFINITION:
Work at this level involves conduct and supervision of a
comprehensive research program involviag a number of individual
projects or independent conduct of a highly speciali:ed research
program. Assignments are defined only in terms of general objec-
tives~ scientist taking full responsibility for identifying prob-
lems, determining specific research Projects to be undertaken,
preparing plans and establishin~ methods and procedures. Plans
are discussed with superiors for conformity with policies but no
technical direction is received~ incumbents being guided by their
o~ interpretation of objectives. Projects may be assi~.ned to
junior re.~earch sCieatists who plan the research work and analy=e
and interpret data. Scientists have wide contacts with persons
in their speciaii:cd field at u~iversitic.~, other research .~tation~
amd ~n ~ndu,~try ~n Canada and abroad. The3 arc expected to attend
and present papers perta[nin~t to their research findi.n~ at national
and international scientific meeting,s.
9U ALI FICATI 0NS:
1. A Master's degree from a university of recogni:ed standin=~
in ~Forestry or Biology or other suitable fields of science~
plus seven years~ experience~ or a Doctor's degree from a
university of recogni:ed standing, plus four year$~
experience.
2. Demonstrated ability to initiate and independently carry
out and supervise scientific research; abilit}' to anal)-ae
amd interpret data, assess the validity of results and
prepare rcport,~ -.'~s show~ by pub.Licatiom~ of scientific
papers of' tli.~h standard, i.'or advanceme~t to this .~rade~
a ~cicm~tist ~halI have achieved roco~nitio, by
il) hi~ ow, and aLii. ed fie.Ids as a~ authority in his field
of ~l)eciali:atiom.
February, 1962'
Title Chan~e - October 3, 1971
~r~nch, CLvi[ S~vLcc
[he 3, 4 or 5 ~evel.of PFS[7, 20.. and 21 'pu,,ti,g Yv:l[u.l~ion uf
tO ekther Re~earch Sc[unti=t ,1 or 5 ),.'w.l, ur PR3, 20 and
· ent rates fo~ ~nd~v~dJal Research S~i~n~i~=Lr. exc~pC as nor. od ~n ~3 .
~ · ab~v~. . ·
. 6 ~ach submission f~r classification to Rv::¢,orch ~ctontis: 4. Or
..... shall ~ accompanied by: ".''
'~. ~ .... ... "~' .'-- ,~i
'' '':" .... fL) The name, current cias~i~Lcotiun ancl ~Iary, and employ~nt ~?'-,.~.
· .- (ii) A stat6~e~ of ~he u~ive~s/~y deq~ccs, Fast graduate degree~,' ~..,~
.:% scholarch/~ and awards obtained ac~o~an/~ by ~ =tatt-mv~t .--
(ii~) ~caLLs of cite current prujec~'~ or sr. udie~ (,~ applicant
inclu~i~ !n,.'oLve~ent in plannLn9, cor:,luc: o~ work, c=llc, ct. in:J
and analyzing ddta, intetpreti,g and .~pplying results, uup, r-
.' vision of ro!n:ed contract0 and grnr, r~. "
Qescriptio~ o( th- hature of nup,~..,ibion received ~nd,
applicable, supervL:ion given ~o ;:rnff or to
scientific t~am. , '
Co~unity. ' A n~ber of s~pl~ roprJnl':~ should be lnc~ude[1,
On~ all thc~c published wltltLt~ th, t ['~t 5
or Baturo of report.
· .. " tees~ t, orra~qLng t~.cht,tcnt [,r~:; and
" s~l~n~t'~kc organizat Ion~.
{viii) ~ts~ of patent~, or new do:~lgns or ~di~icnticnn
d~sig~ oc Jnstc~er~C= and t, vldencu (,[
(ix) O~tdLts Of uny adjunct p~Oft~s~c,r'.;h[I~'ua thc unlv,.csi~y
f~c problems.
"?~'- ~s F~L~or o{ a tox~k ~n n related discipline. :"~'~
..... · .~ ~.~.
~xti) Stronq. tecc~endation by tho appropriate Broach Dizectot -.~
:-: or ~ect/on ~u~etvlso~ i~ ~u~,po~t o~ the classification -' .. '~-'.
- · . ' ~"~'~
~,,~:.~ based O~ the ~VQ suppo~tin9 evidence, a~l .c~e~ncy ~.~ ..... ~.
, ..~ · -. , . .:
.,, ~,~
)e · 'T-
... . ~.~.
~.~ · >:. ' : .~,~
~,..~.~-
BN
NOT~r-: These guidelines amplify upon and clarify ~he existing guidelines
dated August 15, 1981. It ~s understood that ~hey elaborate upon
but do neither contradict nor replace the existing class standards.
The criteria used by the Research Scientist Cor.~ittee to evalGate sub-
missions for ~rogression within r. he series may be considered under the major
headings of Qualifications, Productivity an~ Recognition, which are in t~arn
composed of the following elements:
Qualifications: Degree and years of experience
.-¢~-~' ~ ....... .... ~ty:' Quality, quantity and significance of cutput
Inc!u~ing:
· published papers
published chapters in becks
· investigation reports
. confidential reports
. authority on contracted research
poster presentations
presentation of papers at meetings
. editing (or refereeing) papers for pub!ishlnq
literature citations
. patents
And where applicable:
supervision of other research scientists
. organize'work of o~her research scientists
· develop programs and provide advice
~ generate ideas
Reccgnition: - national or international authority ~
- arrange sessions on specialty
- chair sessions on specialty
- aOjun~t professorship
- represent government on special ccr.mictees as member
or chairman
- member of federal-provincial committees
- received meritorious awards
- provides expert consultation and advice to other agencies
-. provides comments on reports by ccnsultancs and
other agencies
Application ~f ~0is criteria to various levels is s'~nmarized as follows (since
the com~,ittee considers applications for classification at the 3 level and
a.~ove only, ~he Research Scientist 1 and 2 levels are not included):
Research Scientist 3
"~or advancement to this grade, e scientist shall have made a si~nifkcant
ccntr~but~on and shall have achi6ved recognition as a research worker
in a particular field." (S~anda~ for Research Scientist 3 level)
Pcoduct~.v: :y: Conr. inued productivi~y
e.g. - severa~ p~o]ec:s under'way
- severa~ good guaizty
- many internal reports produced
- presents pagers at meetings
~ecognition: ~aving achieved recognition as a research '~orker
a particular field
e.g. - literature citaZ~ons
-reference fr~ individual's last research
supervisor describing individuals' research
projects and hisser con~ibution t0 Lhem
Resaarch~ Scientist 4
"For a/'~ancement :o this grade, a scientist shall have achieved recog-
nition by scien:ists in his. own and allied fields as an au~hcrity in
'his fleld of specialization." (Standard for R%search Scien:ist 4 level)
Qualifications: As per lis~ed in standard
Productivity: High level of.productivity
e.g. - coordinating several projec:~
- many good quality p~lications, a significant
muter of which have been subjected :o peer .
review - the names of ~e editorial board who
carried ou~ ~e review ~o be provided
- significant n,~T. ber of inves:igatlon
- frequently presents papers at meetings
- refere~peer papers for publication
- authority on contracced research
Recognition: Having achieved recognition by scientists in own
allied fields as an authority in field of speciali=a:ion:
- frequent literature citations
- provides comments on reports by consultants,
and other agencies (na:ional and international)
- having served in expert capacity on Ontario
and/or Canadian Scien:ific cc~mit:~e
(T~individual will Supply ~e terms of reference of
the committee(s), names of all members, how he/she
came to be appointed and ~he capacity in which the
individual sits on the co~ittee~s).)
- letter from the individual's supervisor attesting
~o ~e fact that pro3ec:s undercaken were devised
wiLh relatively little assistance and executed
by ~e individual satisfactorily
Research Scientist 5
"Advancement to this grade is limited to sclen~ls: who have achleved
international recognition as authorities in their ,.'~n field. This is
evidenced in the following ways:
i) They have a record of research findings which ~ave been published
widely and have won wide-spread acceptance as ~utstanding contri-
butions by the scientific community.
ii) They are sought to provide advice and as$istam~e on reseaxch
problems by specialists in their own and allied fields." (Standard
Qualifications: As per listed in standard
Prcdu:t!vity and Recognition:
a) The individuals research mu$~ he carrier c%~ independent!y,
i.e. either alone, or as a pro)eot leader.
b) The level of research must be such Lhat it ~%s recogni:ed in,er-
nationally. This recognition can take sera-al forms, but a~
least 3 must be satisfied.
i) serve on an international scientific committee in a sclen-
t~fic capacity - preferably by invitation; '
ii) be ~n an editorial board of a leading scientific journal
in the field;
iii) have given the keynote address at an international confer-
ence preferably outside Canada;
iv) give evidence of extensive reference to own work in o~her
people's scientific publications;
v) ha'ye received any national or international awards for
scientific endeavour.
The individual, to be accepted~in:o this class must provide:
- Details of projects worked on a~names of Lhe team together wi~h
a corroboration from the individual's supervisor that the work
was conceived and carried out independently.
- Terms of reference of co~mittees, names of other members, ~he
capacity in which the individual sits on that committee and how
he/she came to be appointed. Note, mu'ltl-national committees
will "carry more weight" than bilateral committees.
- Details of editorial boards served on, name of journal and c~her
members.
- Letters and mames of papers in ~hich the ~ndividual has been
referred to as well as the paper to ~hich references refer.
- Names and citations of nn[ional or ~nternat~cna! a~.ards.
/ 1. Recommendation by Branch Director in some de%ail stating that one or more
~ of the following ~tems have beon given in evidence of recognition and
are available fo; scrutiny.
2. Invitation from ~': ternational Scientific Organization to present a paper,
acting on a pane} etc.
3. Acting as editor uf papers submitted for publication in scientific journals
at the reques= ¢~ an editoria~ board of the journals concerned.
4. Correspondence f~om other scientists in a related field on significant
scientific ma=te;s.
5. The use by a uni'.ersi%y of part of a published article for teaching
pu.rp<>ses.
6. W%ile the re.cues', for a reprint is not considered significant a .cucte from
a reprLnt in a published article may be signif¼cant.
7. Request on the part of a government or organization for the services of
a Research $cien'aist at the expense of that organization and in a related
field, e.g. Research Scientist to Quebec, to Newfoundland.
8. LecturLng in a related field at a t~niversity.
9. Post graduate students lecturing.
RECEIVED
PERSONNEL BRANCH
ONTARIO }41N[STRY OF