The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-0392.Gervais et al.90-04-10 ONKYO EMPLOYS DE ~ COURONNE -' CROWN EMPLO YENS DE L 'ON ~RtO ~h~ : GRIEVANCE CQMMISSION DE SETFLEMENT REGLEMENT BOARD DES GRIEFS 180. DUNDAS STREET WE$~ ~RONTO, ON~Rt~ MSG 1~ - S~ 21~ TEL~HONE/~PHONE 186 RUE DUNDAS OUE$~ TORONTO, (ON~RI~ MSG 1~. BUR~u 21~ ~1~ 5~-0~8 392/89 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN: 0PSEU {Gervais et al) Grievor - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Health) Employer BEFORE: N.V. Dissanayake Vice-Chairperson I. Thomson Member · D. Clark Member FOR THE D. Wright GRiEVOR: Counsel Ryder, whitaker, Wright and Chapman Barristers & Solicitors FOR THE M. Farson EMPLOYER: Counsel Fraser & Beatty Barristers & Solicitors HEARINGS: October ~0, 1989 March 6, 1990 2 DECISION These are similarly worded grievances filed by fifty Registered Nurses occupying positions classified as Nurse 2, General. The list of grievors is attached to this decision marked as Appendix A. In substance, the grievors claim that they are entitled to be paid acting pay for when they are assigned as Team Leader. To be more specific, the claim is that when they are assigned to perform the duties of a team leader they are being "assigned temporarily to perform duties of a higher classification" within the meaning of Article 6.1.1 of the collective agreement (namely to the Head Nurse position classified as Nurse 3 General) and that therefore they are entitled to acting pay pursuant to that article. The parties agreed that the Board should confine its decision initially to a determination of whether the assignment of a Nurse 2 General to the Team Leader duties is a temporary assignment to perform duties of a position of a higher classification of a higher maximum within the meaning of article 6.1.1 and defer the decision as to whether the~0ther preconditions for the application of the article have been satisfied. At the outset of the hearing, the parties filed with the Board copies of a decision of the Board dated February 8, 1990 in Nichols et al, 778/89 (Knopf). That was a decision that 3 dealt with 31 grievances. The bulk of the grievors in that case are also grievors in the case before us. There, the grievors claimed that when they were assigned as Charge Nurse, they were being temporarily assigned to perform the duties of the Head Nurse position, so as to trigger article 6.1.1. In a well reasoned decision, the Board dismissed the grievances. Having reviewed the duties and responsibilities undertaken by the grievors when assigned to the Charge Nurse position, the Board stated at pages 15 and 16: However, the facts are simply not sufficient to support the grievance. Whether we compare the position specifications of a Registered Nurse and a Head Nurse or the Class Standards of a Nurse 2 to a Nurse 3 General or the actual functions as revealed in the Statement of Facts given to us by the parties, we are led to the inescapable conclusion that the functions performed by the Charge Nurse are functions which were fully contemplated in the Nurse 2 and Registered Nurse position and level. It is true that the Head Nurse position contemplates more supervisory and administrative work than the Registered Nurse. The Head Nurse is responsible for the effective operation of a ward whereas the Registered Nurse is looked upon to provide nursing care. However, a Registered Nurse is also expected as a core function or essential element of his/her duty to provide administrative duties on the ward such as relieving a Head Nurse, providing instructions to other nurses and other clinical staff, monitoring nursing efforts, reporting unusual occurrences and participating as part of ~the clinical treatment team. Further, part of the job standard is that a Nurse 2 General may "supervise the assignment of duties and check the work of subordinate staff on the same shift." Further, it is specifically provided in the Nurse 2 General Standard that "depending on factors such as the hours of duty, the size and the amount of active nursing required in the administrative unit, they are responsible to a supervising nurse for all or part of the nursing or personal care in the administrative unit as assigned." The Standard even goes so far as to say 4 "They may, on occasion, relieve supervising nurses." This is clearly what the Charge Nurse does. Thus, it is clearly part of a Nurse 2 General's essential responsibility to be able to and to act in the role which has been assigned to a Charge Nurse at this facility. Thus, we have not been satisfied that the grievors perform functions which go beyond those expected of a Nurse 2 General or a Registered Nurse. As in the Nichols case, the facts relevant to these grievances were presented to the Board by agreement. Based on these facts, Counsel for the Union attempted to distinguish the Nichols case. It was submitted that when a nurse is assigned as Team Leader, he or she assumed a greater proportion of duties of the higher classification (Head Nurse/ Nurse 3, General) than when assigned as Charge Nurse. Therefore it was argued that the basis for the decision in Nichols did not exist here. We do not propose to set out here the differences in the job functions undertaken by a Team Leader as opposed to a Charge Nurse. It is apparent that a Team Leader has some duties that are not performed by a Charge Nurse. However, we are also convinced that these 'differences are not of any substance or significance as would make the Board's reasoning in Nichols inapplicable. On the contrary, that reasoning applies equally, if not more convincingly, to the facts before US. 5 Briefly stated, as the Board in Nichols, we are led to the inescapable conclusion that the functions performed by the Team Leader are functions fully contemplated in the Nurse 2 General position and level. Similarly, we are also of the view that the alternate basis relied upon by the Board in dismissing the Nichols grievances is also squarely applicable here. That is, that when performing as Team Leader, the grievors were not assigned to the position of Head Nurse, nor did they share the same level of responsibility, accountability or overall functions of the Head Nurse. Like a Charge Nurse, a Team Leader was not expected to undertake a large number of critical functions of the Head Nurse. The Board's function is to simply interpret and apply the collective agreement as we find it. In doing so, we find that the grievors are not entitled to the relief sought and the grievances are accordingly dismissed. NeVertheless, we have no difficulty in understanding the sense, of frustration felt by the grievors. We echo the following observation made by the Board in Nichols, at p. 18: We reiterate that we h~ve no difficulty seeing why these grievances were brought. We note that these Charge Nurses (in this case Team Leaders) lack an institutional recognition, by way. of premiumpay or otherwise, for their additional responsibilities over and above those they undertake as registered nurses. Such recognition is often found in other sectors and may well be. sought by the Union at the bargaining table. However, the function of the Board of Arbitration is simply to interpret and to apply the existing collective agreement. Unfortunately for these grievors, the collective agreement, as currently framed, does not give them the relief they seek. Dated this ]0th ~ay of April, 1990 at ~amilton, Ontario Nimal V. Dissanayake Vice-Chairperson ./~. Thomson Member D. Clark Member GRIEVOR~ Suzanne Babando Barbara Barker John Beaucham9 Klm Bo=man Laurie Buttineau Cindy Chre=ien Barbara Clifford Hadine Cooger Briane Cresswell Don Cruise Catherine Dickie Charles Dyer Elizabeth Gerds Roselynn Gervais Aime Gignac Marylou Gosselin Cynthia Henderson Cindylou Hepins~atl Dorothea Holmes Cam Kurrle Bob Lachlan Karen Leduc Helen Liscombe Diane Loughran Candace Maconachie Susan Magee Annemarie Marshall Timothy Merkley Angela Moreau Laura Moreau Monica Murphy Bruce Nichols MaryLynn O'Connell Glenys Parent Bonnie Pauze Ken Quesnelle Richard Quesnelte Peter Quesnelle Shelley Richie Donna Sallows Mark Shelsffell Cathy Smith Sandra Stonehouse Jennifer Swales Peg Symons Catherine Szafranski Timothy Tyrian Paul Walma Sylvia Westco~t Christine Zurawski