HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-1423.Peters.91-11-27
, ~
~ ': " ONTARIO EMPLOYÉS DE LA COURONNE
CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L 'ONTA RIO
;-
1111 GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE
,
SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT
'BOARD DES GRIEFS
180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2100, TORONTO, ONTARIO. MSG lZ8 TELEPHONF;IT¡;L.ÉPHONE: (416) 326-1388
180, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, 'BUREEAU 2100, TORONTO (ONTARIO). M5G lZ8 FACSIMILEITÉ"LECOPIE ; (415¡ 326- 1396
1423/90
i 0
I
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEHENT BOARD
BETWEEN
OPSEU (Peters)
Grievor
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Revenu~)
Employer
BEFORE: w. Kaplan Vice-Chairperson
w. Rannachan Member
G. Milley Member
FOR. THE c. Dassios
GRIEVOR Counsel
Gowling, strathy & Henderson .
Barristers & Solicitors
FOR THE D. Jarvis
EMPLOYER. Counsel
Winkler, Filion & Wakely .
Barristers & Solicitors
HEARING April 16, 1991
October 2, 3, 1991
.
·-
2 .
Introduction
Bya grievance dated May 22, 1990, Martha Peters, a c1alssified employee
holding a clerk/receptionist position with the Ministry of Revenue in
Brockville, grieves that she was not the successful applicant ili a job
competition for an assessment clerk's position, and seeks by way of remedy
that she be awarded that position. The position was offered through an open-
competition, and it was awarded to Mr. Lyndon Johnston.
In brief, it was the union's position that the grievor was at least equally as
qualified as the successful candidate who did not have any seniority, and in
that result, should have been awarded the position by virtue of Article 4.3 of
the Collective Agreement, which provides:
In filling a vacancy, the Employer shall give primary
consideration to qualifications and ability to perform the
required duties. .Where qualifications and ability are
relatively equal, length of continuous servic1e shall be a
consideration.
Union counsel also argued that there were sufficient procedural
irregularities in the actual running of the competition so as to require the
Board to set the result aside and order a rerun.
The employer took the position that the sofe matter to be determined was
whether the grievor and the successful candidate were relatively equal in
qualifications and ability to perform the posted position. In counsel's view,
only if the union could establish superiority or equality could the grievance
succeed. He argued that such procedural irregularitie~¡ as might exist did
not ultimately affect the determination that the incumbE!nt was the person
best qualified for the position in question, in that he had previous work
experience in the position in question, as well as a diploma in assessment.
;
1 3
Mr. Johnston was given not.ice of these proceedings, and he made a number
of submissions with respect to the competition.
The Evidence
Some of the evidence was not in dispute. The job was posted on March 30,
1990 with a closing date of April 24, 1990. The position in question is ,
"Assessment Clerk" with an "OA 6" classification. The position is described
in the posting as follows:
The Ministry of Revenue, Property Assessment Program,
announces an opening for an Assessment Clerk to provide
clerical services in support of the Assessment Program
in the Brockville Regional Office. You will operate the
data processing equipment. process a variety of
documents for the update and maintenance of manual and
automated recoras; calculate the assessed value for
various types of prop~rty; answer assessment data
.~nquiries; assist with the enumeration program and"at . .
public information sessions.
.n
QUALIFICATIONS: Related clerical experience in the
editing and processing of data including operation of
electronic data processing equipment; ability to perform
arithmetic calculations: ability to organize and
complete work accurately and within deadlines; ability
to commu.nicate effectively and courteously with the
public, in person and via the telephone.
[remainder omitted]
. .
.
Mr. J.T. Edmunds, the Regional Assessment Commissioner and one of the three
members of the selection committee, recommended that an open competition
be held for the following reasons:
I request this position be advertised as an open
competition. If the area of search is restricted to
.
4
classified staff, there would be only one applicant from ,
this office. Therefore, I feel the area of search should be
open to allow for a greater number of applicants.
Mr. Edmunds' recommendation was accepted. There Wl~re 27 applications
received for the position, and nine applicants were selected for interviews.
The two other members of the selection committee were Mr. Jim Stover. and
Mr. Mervin Dougherty. Ms. Gloria Whiteland, the Mana£ler of Data'Services,
conducted some tests for the committee, and also participated in discussions
about the applicants. At the end of the interview process, Mr. Johnston
scored first, and the grievor scored fourth. The grievor was the only
candidate with seniority.
While there was some dispute between the parties as to the exact
characterization of the position (the union argued that it was essentially
clerical, while the employer took the position that it involved a higher
.
degree of skill and ability than that normally associated with clerical
positions) the parties did agree as to the basic duties as~)ociated wit~ the
job. The position invorves updating and maintaining the OASYS System,
which is a computerized real property data base connected to a mainframe
computer in Oshawa. Assessment clerks are required tel take various
documents, such as building permits, title deeds, and property descriptions,
and transla.te the information on these documents into codes for entry into
the OASYS system. This data is used for a variety of purposes including
voters' lists, jury selection, assessment of levies, and prCIperty taxes. A
number of the assessment clerks have been promoted to that position ,from
reception/secretarial positions similar to that held by thegrievor.
The Union Case
Ms. Peters gave evidence on her own behalf. She testified about her
educational background, and told the Board about a number of computer
,
5
:
courses that she has taken on her own time, as well as about an assessment
course she completed. Ms. Peters began work with the Ministry in 1984.
Since that time her duties have included answering the phone, typing for the
assessors, dealing with the public in person and on the telephone. For a
period of approximat~ly two months in 1986 Ms. Peters input-work permits
onto the Lotus software computer systems, a job normally performed by
assessm:nt clerks. Ms. Peters was given a familiariz~tion course in the
OASYS system and in 1987, Ms. Peters did some tracking for theenumeratìon
program for several weeks, and this involved using that system. Ms. Peters
had also worked in an acting capacity as the Commis'sioner's secretary, and
her job included typing for members of management, scheduling meetings,
. handing out pay cheques, and a variety of other duties and responsibilities.
Over the years, Ms. Peters has performed a number of other responsible jobs,
including listing deeds and plans for registered subdivisions, as we 11_ as
installing on computer the Word Perfect software system.
. .
Ms. Peters testified that since she worked in the same office as the
assessment clerks she knew what they wer~ doing, and she briefly outlined
to the Board same of their duties arid responsibilities. Turning to the job
pasting, Ms. Peters testified that she has experience in operating data
processing equipment, and she referred to her experience with Word Perfect,
Star, and Latus. Ms. Peters has not calculated assessed value, but she has
done other property calculations. Ms. Peters has extensive experience in
dealing with the public and answering enquiries. The grievor also testified
about her organization skills, and told the Board about the responsibìlìty she
took for collating and mailing out a major report on two separate occasions.
This job was accomplished with a very low error rate.
Ms. Peters gave some evidence with respe9t to the interview process. Ms.
1
6 -
Peters knew Mr. Edmunds because she had worked for him. The grievor also
knew Mr. Stover and Ms. Whiteland, who administered the tests. The griever
did not know Mr. Dougherty, who came from Pembroke. The grievor .testified
that the interview lasted for approximately twenty to thirty minutes.
In cross-examination, the grievor agreed that a fundamEmtal function of the
assessment clerks was inputting assessed value, and that this function was
extremely important because that value was part of what determined
municipal taxes. Errors in inputting could be significant, because the ~ystem
was also used to establish voters' lists and jury rolls. T~le pOSition
specification was brought to the grievor's attention and, in particular, the
many references on it to the requirement for accuracy. The grievor was
reminded. of one of her responses t,o a question on the interview, and it was
to the effect that one of her weaknesses was going too f,?st, and in the result
making mistakes.
The grievor was asked about the major reports she had prepared and collated
and about her evidence that they had been produced with a low error rate. In
particular, it was suggested to her that in the process of preparing these
reports significant errors were made. It was also sugge:sted to her that the
report was not, on one occasion, prepared in time for thiS' due date. The
grievor agreed that there may have been errors in the p?'ocess, but at the end
of the day, the error rate was very low. The grievor also testified that Mr.
Stover had assigned her work in the past, ~nd that work included typing and
photocopying. The grievor was asked if Mr. Stover expressed any concerns to
her with respect to accuracy, and she testified that he nEwer made a big deal
out of it, and that he would tell her when there was a mistake. In Ms. Peters'
view, no more than 15 percent of the documents she pmpared had errors in
them, and the reason many documents had to be changed was because Mr.
.
,
.
; I
~ 7 I
Stover would make changes ~~ them.
Ms. Peters was also asked about the work she did for Ms. Whiteland, and it·
was suggested to her that a lot of the typing and copying she did for Ms.
Whiteland had to be returned to her. The grievor testified that Ms. Whiteland
did not bring her very much wor~, and that if there was a mistake, Ms.
Whiteland was more likely to correct it herself. Ms. Peters testified that her
error rate. with Ms. Whiteland's work was no more than 5 percent.
Ms. Peters was asked about her work for Mr. Edmunds (a period of some
months beginning in early 1990 when the grievor worked in an"acting
capacity as Mr. Edmunds' secretary), and about a meeting early in that
assignment at which time Mr.. Edmunds expressed some concerns about her
typing accuracy. Ms. Peters agreed that the meeting took place, and agreed
that Mr. Edmu~dS told her at that time that if ~he did not improve she would
not be allowed to continue in the acting position.
The grievor was asked whether she had any familiarity with the OASYS
manuals, and she agreed that she did not. However, she testified that she
saw no reason why she could not become familiar with them in the same way
she had become familiar with the manuals for the other programs she
operated. The grievor was asked some questions about her training and
experience relative to that of Mr. Johnston, and in particular whether
experience in doing the job, not to mention completion of the assessors
course, would make an individual ämore competitive candidate. In brief, Ms.
Peters conceded that experience would be helpful, but she maintained that
with appropriate training she could have done the job in question. Ms. Peters
was asked about the math test, and whether or not she had difficulty with
the question. While there was some dispute on this point in the eviden.ce
8
which follows, it appears that Ms. Peters was reviewing 1he question, and
that Ms. Whiteland, believing the grievor had forgotten the formula to be
,applied, volunteered it to her.
In reexamination the grievor was asked somE~ questions about making
mistakes, and she impressed the Board with her candor in admitting when she
"-
had made a mistake, and taking responsibility for it. The! grievor was also
asked about the meeting with Mr. Edmunds at which timl~ concerns about
accuracy were brought to her attention. Ms. Peters told the Board that she
remained in the position, and that, moreover, Mr. Edmunds later told her that
she had improved by 95 percent.
The Employer's Cas~
Mr. Stover, who has significant experience and seniority with the Ministry,
gave evidence first on behaU of the employer. At the time of the grievance
Mr. Stover was the Manager of Data Services and Mapping, and was
responsible for the work of the seven assessment clerks who are directly
supervised by Ms. White land. There are approximately ~12,OOO properties in
the Brockville region that must be maintained on the OASYS system, and Mr.
Stover elaborated on the kind of information which must I:>e input, as well as
the different sources of that information. The occupancy" owner status and
school support designation of a property must be registered, as must the
legal property description, and data on the size and structure of the property.
Mr. Stover outlined some of the different uses of this information. School
support designations, for instance, will determine the amount of money
received in provincial grants. The information on OASYS is clearly of some
importance, and Mr. Stover conveyed that importance to thè Board. Mr. Stover
testified that the assessment clerks spend approximately 75 percent to 85
percent of their time operating the OASYS system.
9
;
In brief, assessors visit properties in order to obtain the necessary
information, which is transmitted t9 assessment clerks on cards, and these I
cards, along with other documents, are used to enter the information into the I
system. There are a number of manuals which the clerks must refer to, and I
up to twenty different source documents. In Mr. Stover's view, analytical
skills are necessary in the inputting of the data, for the clerk must figure
out exactly what it is that the assessor is attempting to communicate.
Sometimes clerks must contact the ratepayer in order to clarify information.
In Mr. Stover's view, the experience of the grievor as a clerk/receptionist
.
was not relevant to the assessor clerk's position because it did not involve
data processing, the learning and analyzing of the various manuals, and the
exercise of interpretative and analytical skills. Mr. Stover was asked about
- .
the work the grievor performed o~ an acting basis ~s the Commis$.ioner'.s
secretary, and testified that this work involved typing, filing and scheduling
and was also not relevant, in his view, to the position of assessor clerk.
Mr. Stover's attention was'drawn to Mr. Johnston's resume, and he told the
Board that the incumbenfs experience in the actual job, as well as his having
taken the assessor's course, and his experience with data bases, led him to
the conclusion that Mr. Johnston had directly relevant qualifications for the
position. Mr. Johnston's work as an accounting clerk was also considered
useful, as was his work as a real estate appraiser. In contrast, the only -...
experience of the grievor that Mr. Stover considered relevant were her
keyboard skills.
Mr. .Stover was asked about the training necessary to become an assessment
clerk, and he testified tha~ in the case of someone with no previous
r
10
knowledge, it would take the better part of a year for that person to be
working as full clerk. Even if the person had extensive sl9cretarial
experience it would, in.his view, take that long. Mr. StoVl:~r testified that it
only took approximately one week of training to get Mr. Johnston working as
an assessment clerk, and the reason was his training and previous jab
experience.
Mr. Stover testified that in considering the grievor for the position, he was
concerned about her accuracy and the quality of her typing. Mr. Stover told
the Board that the grievor had an error rate of approximately 25 percent in
the work that she did for him. Mr. Stover did not have any direct knowledge
about Mr. Johnston's work performance because he arrived in the Brockvílle
office after Mr. Johnston had first worked there.
-
Turning to the intervie.w process, Mr. Stover told the BC;>,ard that he and Ms.
Whiteland and Mr. Edmunds reviewed the applications for the position and
determined who would be invited for an interview. Mr. Stover prepared the
interview questions. Mr. Stover told the Board that in preparing the
questions he kept in mind that the majority of applicants for the position
would come from outside the office. There are three sections on the
questionnaire: Experience/Skills, Technical Knowledge, and Communication
Skills. The test portion of the questionnaire follows the Communication
Skills part of the interview, and has two components: keyboard skills and
mathematical skills. Ms. Whiteland was responsible for administering the
keyboard and math tests, and it appears that after each interview was
conducted she administered these two tests and then reported the results to
the selection committee.
None of the questions was assigned specific scores, and no correct answers
, - . ~ .,
:
1 1
were prepared in advance. From a reading of the questionnaire it is clear
.
why. Few, if any, of the questions have a correct answer. Mr, Stover
testified that Experience/Skills was the most important part of the
interview, a~d it was in fact assigned a value of 10d out ofa total value of
175. The questions Mr. Stover considered most important in this part were
questions 2 and 8. They arè as follows:
2. Briefly describe your qualifications including
skills, experience and academic training that you possess
which are relevant and applicable to the position. (eg.
Assessment, Administration, Supervisor, EDP
experience) .
8. Do you feel confident with your'mathematical and
typing skills.
Other questions in this section asked applicants to describe weaknesses, to
. , indicate whether they res'ponded well'to constructive cr,iticism, and about
matters such as whether it would be a problem to work overtime. In Mr.
Stover's view, questions 2 and 8 were worth approximately 75 of the 100
points available in the "Experience/Skills" section.
Mr. Stover testified that each member of the committee marked his scores
after each interview. The keyboard and math skills were tallied in as
reported by Ms. Whiteland. After all of the interviews were completed, the
selection committee, with the assistance of Ms. Whiteland, had a "bull
session," at which time the committee members went over all of the
questions and answers, and the scores assigned to each of them. These
preliminary scores, including the scores reported by Ms. Whiteland, were
subsequently adjusted, and final scores' were arrived at. Suffice it to say
that before the adjustment the grievor had an average score of 129.6, while
the incumbent had an aye rage score of 141 .6. The difference between the
12
two scores was 9.3 percent. After the adjustment, the grievor had an
average score of 124.3, while the incumbent had an average score of 142.3, a
difference between the two of 14.5 percent. It should be pointed out,.
however, that after the adjustment the grievor was fourth overall, with two
other candidåtes having higher scores than her. More will be said below
about the explanations offered for the adjustments. Mr. Stover told the Board
that in addition to reviewing the scores, the resumes of the applicants were
reviewed, and the members of the selection committee, as well as Ms.
Whiteland, spoke about their own 'experience with each of the candidates.
Although all of the applicants with the exception of the gr":evor were from
outside the public service, all but two of them had on one occasion or another
worked in the office. The selection committee reached t~:e conclusion that
Mr. Johnston was the most qualified and the most experil3nced, and after
considering article 4.3 of the Collective Agreement, they decided to offer
him the job.
In cross-examination Mr. Stover was asked about the job requirements, and
his attention was drawn to the posting reproduced in part above. Mr. Stover
agreed that the posting fairly described the position in qUt~stion, and also
agreed that it did not list assessor training as a requiremeint. Although Mr.
Johnston's resume does not indicate that he worked on OASYS in 1985, and
although Mr. Stover was not in Brockville at that time, he told the Board that
he was aware from Ms. Whiteland of Mr. Johnston's prior experience with this
system. Mr. Stover was asked about some of the specific questions and the
criteria he employed for assigning marks. For example, Cine question was:
"What dò you believe are your personal strengths?" In marking replies, Mr.
Stover testified that he was looking for applicants to be hClnest with
themselves. The question was designed so that he could get a feel for the
I person. Th~ same was true with respect to a number of other questions.' Mr.
,
;
13
~
Stover agreed that the information sought for question 2 could be found on
.,
the applicants' resumes or application forms.
Mr. Stover gave further evidence about some of the more complex fun9tions
'.
of the assessor clerk's position, which indicated to him the need for
analytical and interpretative skills. In particular, he explained to the Board "
some of the problems for school support that emerge when two ratepayers
jointly occupy a premise and one of them is a Roman Catholic and the other is
a Protestant. Basically, the clerk must be alert to this possibility and to the
steps that need to be taken when it arises. In other examples, the clerks
must carefully select the right code and right box on the screen when
inputting data. Although the job posting did not specifically refer to
correction of the assessors' work, Mr. Stover testified that this is a frequent
occurrence, and could be included under the term "editing," which appears in
the .posting. The jQ~ posting was similarly silent with respect to the
interpretative requirements of the position. Mr. Stover agreed that the
. correcting and interpretative requirements were acquired on the job, and
were not required prior to beginning the position. Mr. Stover was asked a
number of other questions about the requirements for the pÒsition as
indicated· on the posting. For example, in his'view, communicating
effectively meant more than just responding to a member of the public in the
way the grievor would as a receptionist. It meant responding in an effective
way by dealing with complicated matters relating to assessment.
Mr. Stover testified that during the interview process he made some
notations of marks on a sheet of foòlscap, but that sheet was no longer
available. He also made notations right on the questionnaire. It was not
clear why some of the notations were made on the missing foolscap sheet
and some were made on the questionnaire. Mr. Stover indicated that while
1
14
questions 2 and 8 in the "Experience/Skills" portion were important, so was .
question 9, which asked the applicants if they would find it difficult to
I concentrate in an open concept office environment. It was suggested to the
witness that the two applicants did not anSWEir questions 2 ~nd 9
differently, and that as a result, question 8 should have been the basis of
determining which candidate was better. Mr. Stover agmed with that
suggestion from the point of view of the interview, althou!~h not from the
point of view of the applications.
With respect to article 4.3 of the Collective Agreement, Mr. Stover testified
that he was aware of the provision, and that Mr. Edmunds mentioned
something at some point about the significance of a 10 percent gap in the
scores. Mr. Stover was not personally aware of a ministry policy to the
effect that marks within 10 percent were considered relatively equal for the
purpos~ of applying article 4.3. Mr. Stover testified that after the
interviews were conducted the selection committee met for at least one hour
to discuss the candidates, and that Ms. Whiteland was asked to return to
work (she had gone home at the end of the day) to give the committee her
input about the candidates and how they had all scored. In addition to
speaking to Ms. Whiteland about the grievor, Mr. Stover also spoke to Mr.
Edmunds, who had supervised her, and his report was "not complimentary."
He did not speak to her direCt supervisor for the period in which she was not
in the acting position. Ms. Whiteland also told the selectic,n committee about
all but two of the other candidates who had worked in the office on previous
occasions. Mr. Stover told the Board that the two candidates, other than the
incumbent, who scored higher than the grievor had received higher marks
because of their background and experience and becausø of the references
provided by Ms. Whiteland. Mr. Stover did not check personnel files.
,<
15 I
" In reexamination, Mr. Stover testified that he believed that someone who
possessed a business diploma in assessment appraisal in real estate would,
make a better candidate for an appraisal clerk's position than someone
who'did not. Similarly, someone who had OASYS experience was more
competitive than someone who did not.
Mr. Edmunds also testified on behalf of the employer. He has been the
Regional Assessment Commissioner since June 1989, and his seniority with
< the miñistry dates from 1972. The grievor worked for a period as Mr.
Edmunds' secretary when his regular secretary went on maternity leave. Mr.
Edmunds approved holding an open competition because he knew that the
grievor would be the only internal applicant, and he was of the opinion that
at least thr~e applicants were required to run a competition. Mr. Edmunds
reviewed and approved the questions after Mr. Stover prepared them. Mr.
. Edmunds briefly desCribed the interview process. The candidates were
brought in, introduced to the panel, some opening comments about the
position were made, the candidates were advised that they could ask
questions if they haq them or needed clarification, and following the
interview they were taken out and given a test by MS.Whiteland. At the end
of each interview, the three members of the selection committee
indepEmdently assigned scores.
Mr. Edmunds testified it was considered unnecessary to contact the
references indièated by the candidates because the competitive candidates
were known to at least one member of the committee. The committee
members, and Ms. Whiteland, brought this knowledge to bear in the
discussion, and it was a factor in determining who received the job offer.
Mr. Edmunds testified about his own experience with the grievor. .She was
16
his secretary, on an acting basis, at the time of the competition, and her
duties included typing, opening the mail, and making travel arrangements. Mr.
Edmunds testified tha~ she made more than the average number of mistakes,
but that the grievor was willing to make corrections. The' two of them had a
number of informal discussions about the problem, and one formal discusslon
in which she was advised that unless improvements were forthcoming, she
would be returned to her receptionist position. There was an improvement
and the grievor completed the acting assignment. Mr. Edmunds testified that
he considered the grievor's performance in this position in making a
selection. The witness did not have any prior experiencEl with Mr. Johnston.
Mr. Edmunds reiterated much of Mr. Stover's evidence about what happened
. after the interviews were conducted. He testified that bo~~h the preliminary
and final scores were arrived at independently, and that the committee used
the scores, without changes, supplied by Ms. Whiteland. The original score
sheets for all three members of the committee for all of the candidates were
introduced into evidence, and the changes in scores hig~i1ighted. It is not
possible to determine with certainty exactly how the SCO(l95 were changed,
since both the preliminary as well as the final scores are indicated in pencil
in every case, and so it is a matter of attempting to see the outline of the
preliminary score, which has been erased, under the final one.
In any case, it can be said that a great many scores werEl changed in both
directions, and by all three members of the selection committee. Mr.
Edmunds, for example. reduced the score he had initially given the grievor for
experience from 80 to 75 because of the benefit of the discussion he had had
with other panel members. In this regard. Mr. Edmunds considered the
various jobS and educational qualifications of the incumbf~nt, as well as
those of the grievor. While the secretarial position provided her with
I
~
17
relevant keyboard experience, it was of limited related yalue. When Mr.
Edmunds compared the employment history of the two candidates he was
satisfied that Mr. Johnston's background and qualifications were considerably
better than those of the grievor, In his words, there nwas no comparison"
between the two. In reaching his final decision,.Mr. Edmunds testified that
he looked at the resumes of the applicants, the interview scores and the
references that had been internally provided by members of the committee '
including himself. It was on this basis that the decision was made to offer
the position to Mr. Johnston.
In cross-examination, Mr. Edmunds testified that he knew that Mr. Johnston
was interested in.a position in the office, and that he would drop in from
time to time to see if there were any jobs. Mr. Edmunds also knew that Mr.
Johnston had previously applied for an assessor's position.
Mr. Edmunds testified that Ms. Whiteland knew the grievor better than he did.
He also testified that after he spoke to the grievor about her errors, there
was a limited improvement in her work. Mr. Edmunds did not recall saying
that the grievor had improved by 95 percent. Mr. Edmunds told the Board that
none of the other assessment clerks had completed an assessment course.
The grievor had, as previously noted, completed such a course.
With respect to the application of article 4.3 of the Collective Agreement,
Mr. Edmunds testified that in his 19 years of seniority with the ministry he
had never heard of a 10 percent policy, Le., that differences of less than 10
percent were considered relatively equal for the purpose of applying this
provision of the Collective Agreement. Mr. Edmunds was aware of some
decisions of this Board that a 10 percent spread between candidates could be
relevant in article 4.3 cases. Mr. Edmunds testified that he never told Mr.
I
1 8
Stover anything about a ministry policy abo~t 10 percent spreads and
relative equality. What he told him was that there were decisions of this
Board that dealt with this issue.
Mr. Edmunds was asked about the unwritten rule that thme be three
candidates for each position, and he testified that this rul13 emanated from
the Personnel Department, although he has never seen the rule in writing. Mr.
Edmunds also gave some evidence with respect to the rElasons why Ms.
Whiteland suggested that some of the scores be changed, but as Ms. Whiteland
also testified in this regard, it is not necessary to repeat tl1at evidence here.
In reexamination, Mr. Edmunds testified that his knowled!Je of the 10 percent
Board rulings did not play any role in his decision to alter any of the scores,
or to award the position to Mr. Johnston instead of the grievor. With respect
to reference checks, Mr. Edmunds testified that he prefers his own knowledge
of applicants to that given to him by strangers.
Ms. Whiteland was the third and final witness called by the employer. ~n her
capacity of Manager of Data Services, Ms. Whiteland is the direct supervisor
for all of the assessment clerks. She is responsible for training staff and
for assisting Mr. Stover as required. Ms. Whiteland contacted the nine
candidates selected for an interview, and she. scheduled the interviews. On
the day of the interviews, Ms. Whiteland conducted the køyboard and math
tests. The keyboard test involved the candidates reading a data entry form
and entering the information about a structure onto the screen. This test,
which took a few moments, was designed to determine wnether or nor the
candidates could key information into the right place. ThE! math test involved
the calculation of the area of a structure from information supplied on a
diagram. Very simply, it involved the multiplication of len9th times width.
,.
. .
,
1 9
,
Ms. Whiteland testified that Mr. Johnston knew how to perform the math
without any assistance, while it was necessary for her to tell Ms. Peters how
, .
to do it. Ms. Whiteland noted the scores at the time of each test and
conveyed those scores to the selection committee." At the end of the day.
when Ms. Whiteland was called back into the office, she made some changes
to the keyboard and math skills of Mr. Johnston and Ms. Peters. Originally, Mr.
. .'
Johnston had received a six for his keyboard skills. However, upon reflection
Ms. Whiteland determined that his skills were equivalent to those of the
grievor so she raised his score by two points to eight. Mr. Johnston had
performed the math perfectly and without hesitation, and so he was given a
ten. Ms. Whiteland ~Iso lowered the grievor's math score from a ten to a
eight because she had to tell the grievor how to make the calculation.
Ms. \1Yhiteland also testified about her work experience with the grievor.
Suffice it to say that the grievor did considerable correspondence work for
Ms. Whiteland's area, and in the performance of that work Ms. Whiteland found
a high degree of error. Ms. Whiteland brought this experience to the attention
of the selection committee. Ms. Wh~teland also brought her experience with
Mr. Johnston to the attention of the selection committee. In 1984-1985, Mr.
Johnston worked in the office, and Ms. White land trained him in the operation
of the OASYS system. Ms. Whiteland testified that he caught on' easily, and
that while it usually takes a person six months to a year to get up and
running, Mr. Johnston was fully up to speed in approximately ona month. Ms.
Whiteland testified that after he was awarded the position it took Mr.
Johnston abo~t one week to get going.
In cross-examination, Ms. Whiteland testified that when she was
administering the math test to the griever she could see that the griever
.
I
20
could not do it and so offered her assistance. It does not appear that the
grievor requested this assistance. Ms. Whiteland was asked why she thought
at the time of the marking of the keyboard test that the grievor was worth an
eight and Mr. Johnston a six, while when ShE~ was brought back to the office
after work she changed her mind and determined that the two deserved equal
marks. It was suggested to her that the presence of her supervisor and Mr.
Edmunds may have influenced her change of mind. Ms. Whiteland testified,
.
however, that she changed her mind on her own.
Union Reply
Ms. Peters testified that she never asked for any assistance from Ms.
Whiteland in the math test. Rather, she received the test and was briefly
considering it when Ms. Whiteland spoke up and explainl9d how to do it.
The evidence having been completed, the matter proceeded to argument.
Union Argument
Counsel for the union made two alternative submissions: First, that the
grievor ought to be placed in the assessment clerk position because, at the
very least, she was relatively equal to the incumbent, and in that result, her
seniority should have been taken into account given article 4.3 of the
Collective Agreement. And second, and in the alternativf3, counsel submitted
that the competition process was so flawed so as to render it impossible to
reach any conclusions about superiority or relative equality, and that it
should, in that result, be set aside and a new competition ordered.
Turning to his first submission, union counsel argued that the job is a simple
clerical position, and this is evidenced by the posting itself, as well as by
the questions the candidates were asked in the interview part of the process.
.
;
21
;
In coun~el's view, if one assumes the propriety of these questions, they
indicate that the job is not highly complex in that none of the questions
elicits substantive knowledge of the job being sought. Similarly, the math
test just involved multiplication, and the keyboard test just involved typing.
Both of these tests hardly indicated a requirement for skills and knowledge
beyond those demonstrated by the grievor. The fact that oth,er clerk!
receptionists in the office moved to the assessor clerk's position gave a
further indication of the level of complexity of the position. The fact that
none of the assessment clerks had ever completed an assessor's course and
the grievor had was another factor worth keeping in mind. .
Reviewing the questions in more detail, counsel argued that a careful
examination of the questions and answers did not lead to the co'nclusion that
the incumbent should have received a higher final mark than the grievor.
There was, for example; no b,asis, in counsel's view, to "find a'major
difference in the experience and skills of the two. The fact that the grievor
had accounting and supervisory experience was simply not relevant to the
assessor clerk's position. ·In counsel's submission, Mr. Johnston's experience
in that position, some five or six years previously, should not stand in the
way of the seniority rights ofa long-serving employee.
Counsel turned to the stated qualifications on the posting, and argued that
the grievor met these qualifications. She had the related clerical experience
in the editing and processing of data, and counsel reviewed the grievor's
evidence with respect to the computer programs she had installed, and her
experience with different types of software. In counsel's submission, OASYS
is just another type of software, and given the grievor's previous computer
experience there was little reason not to believe that she could, become
fully functional on that software. In that regard, counsel referred to the
.
1
22
. evidence that it normally took some months of training to become a
functional assessment clerk, and that there were manuals and other
assistance available for persons being trained in this position. Moreover,
counsel referred to Mr. Stover's evidence that the important skills of
interpreting and correcting data were learned on the job.
Counsel argued that the grievor met the other qualificatiClns of the posting,
and he discussed some of her evidence in this respect. There was no dispute:
for instance, that Ms. Peters communicated effectively with the public.
Counsel conceded that there had been problems in the past with errors, but he
pointed to the grievor's testimony that Mr. Edmunds advi:sed her that she had
improved by 95 percent. The fact that she passed her probationary period in
the acting position was further evidence of the absence elf any significant
problems with her work. With respect to that work, counsel noted the
omission of any consideration by the selection committeH of a reference
from the grievor's own supervisor, who presumably knew her work the best.
In counsel's view, the evidence indicated that the grievor and Mr. Johnston
were at least equal in qùalifications and ability, and so given the grievor's
greater seniority, and given article 4.3 of the Collective Algreement, counsel
submitted that the Board should exercise its discretion to award the job to
Ms. Peters.
Turning to the process, and his second and alternative submission, counsel
noted a number of factors which he argued tainted the result, and which
should lead ~he Board to ordering a rerun in this case. CQunsel questioned the
decision of the employer to run an open competition, and suggested that the
knowledge that Mr. Johnston was interested in a position was in some way
responsible for that decision. Counsel argued that the questions on the
questionnaire were extremely subjective, and the absencl9 of a grading
I
.' .
;
23
.
scheme or correct answers was also questionable. Counsel referred the
Board to the decision in Esmai11186/87 (Dissanayake), a case where the
selection process was found to be riddled with procedural errors.. One of
these defects was reliance by the selection panel on a list of prepared
questions without any prepared answers. This problem was exacerbated by
the subjective nature of some of those questions, which, as a result, were
."
subjectively marked. It is noteworthy that one of the questions the panel in
Esmail singled out for driticism is identical to one of the questions asked in
the instant case, namely "What are your career goals?" An interesting
question perhaps, but as the panel noted in that case, and as we note here,
that question has absolutely nothing do with the"job being sought. In Esmail
I the Board concluded that the result of all the flaws was a failure to properly
assess the applicants. Accordingly, the employer was ordered to rerun the
competition. Union counsel argued that the subjective questions and marking
scheme in the instant case should lead to a similar result.
Union counsel also argued that the interview procedure råised more questions
than answers. At the end of the day, when the scores were first tabulated,
less than ten percent separated the grievor and Mr. Johnston. Then Ms.
. Whiteland was called back into work after going home for the day and there
was a reconsideration of all the scores, including the keyboard and math
scores, and new final scores were arrived at. This time the difference
between the two was fourteen percent. Counsel argued that Mr. Stover and
Mr. Edmunds knew that this Board considers gaps of less than ten percent
significant in article 4.3 cases, and suggested that the changes were, to say
the least, questionable. Counsel turned to some of the changes that were
made, and argued that no reasonable explanation about why those changes
were necessary had been provided. At one point, for instance, Ms. Whiteland
thought that Mr. Johnston's keyboard skills deserved a six. Later in the day,
24
they deserved an eight. What had changed, counsel asked? And the only
answer that he could provide was that Ms. Whiteland must have been
influenced by her supervisor and by the Commissioner to change her marks.
Counsel also referred the Board to the Mcintyre 141/85 (Knoppf) decision. In
Mcl ntyr~ the Board ordered a competition rerun because the selection
committee had failed to review personnel files, or make reference checks.
The Board in Mcintyre also expressed some concern about the absence of
consultation among selection committee members on thH anomalies in the
different candidates' scores, and noted that "the methods adopted by the
interviewers here were a lesser evil than the risk of collusion that would
have been created had the interviewers consulted with each other on their
scores" (at 8). Counsel argued that in the instant case, there was an
apprehension of collusion as a result of the consultation.
In this regard, counsel drew the Board's attention to the following
observations in the VaillanQ.Qurt 1620/87 (Wilson) decision:
The Mclntyr~ case is as Union counsel pointed out the
reverse of the present situation. The Mcln~'re panel did
however refer specifically to the danger of collusion
where the interviewers consulted on their scores. The
selection panel in our case did consult and did award
uniform scores. Schell got 54 (44 + 1 o for attendance)
and the griever got 37 (27 + 10 for attendance). Mcintyre
indicates that prohibited scoring is that arrivød at by
collusion. Actually, in my opinion, collusion need not be
actually shown to invalidate a scoring procelss: collusion
is defined in the dictionary as "secret agreements for a
wrongful purpose, especially between persons wishing to
defraud another or between persons who do not wish to
appear as adversaries." I doubt that the Board in
Mcintyre meant that the grievor actually had to show
that level of corruption to invalidate a scorinn process. I
would be willing to set aside a set of scores where the
25
evic;fence showed that three members of the panel
actually surrendered their individual judgments. Uniform
scoring is an indication of that and does raise a very
serious doubt...(at 8-9).
In counsel's view, the evidence strongly supported the assertion thåt Ms.
Whiteland must have been influenced to change her score, and in that result
she surrendered her individual judgment necessary to validate the marks that
she assigned. Union counsel also referred to some of the evidence of Mr.
Edmunds in this respect, and argued that the facts of this case raise
sufficient concerns about the scoring process, and the possible presence of
collusion, to necessitate t!:le scores being set aside.
COU':1sel concluded his submissions by referring to the Poole 2508/87
(Samuels) decision, which in turn makes reference to the well-known
decision of the Board in MacLelland and DeGrandis 506/81, which sets out
various criteria for the evaluation of job competitions. Applying these
criteria to the instant case, counsel argued that irrelevant factors were·
taken into áccount, and gave as an example the question on the questionnaire
dealing with career goals. Counsel also pointed out that personnel files were
not consulted, and that the grievor's direct supervisor was not contacted to
provide a reference. In counsel's view, these factors and others described
above lead inevitably to the conclusion that the process in this case was so
questionable that the results should not be allowed to stand. Counsel urged
~
the Board to order a rerun between the incumbent and the grievor subject to
the usual terms in cases of this kind.
Fmployer Argument
Employer counsel began his argument with some observations on the law to
be applied, and argued that for the grievor to be awarded the assessment
clerk position, the union must establish that Ms. Peters was at least
26
relatively equal to Mr. Johnston. In counsel's submission, the union had failed
to discharge this onus. It had also failed, employer counsel argued, to
der:nonstrate on the balance óf probabilities that had flaws in the
competition not occurred the grievor would have been found to be relatively
equal to Mr. Johnston (Bent 1733/86 (Fisher)). Counsel candidly
aqknowledged that there were flaws, but argued that at the end of the day
the superior candidate was selected, and that corr~ction of the flaws still
would have led to this result.
Counsel referr!3d the Board to a number of decisions including Cross 339/89
(Jolliffe), where the Board discusses what is meant by "qualifications and
ability" under article 4.3. The Board in that case notes that experience is not
the sáme as seniority, and that past skills and education may be relevant
factors to consider in making determinations under this provision. Counsel
also cited Anderson 105/86 (Wright) to the Board, and argued ,t,hat in applying
the criteria discussed in that case to the instant one, the evidence indicated
that the incumbent was best qualified by a substantial and demonstrable
margin. The Anderson case also stands for the proposition that once
assigned, marks are not fixed in stone for as "long as thH changes are
honestly made as part of the overall competitive process there is no cause
for concern" (at 7). Finally, counsel referred the Board to the Gavel 145/80
(Barton) decision for the proposition that it is not up to panels of this Board
to "second guess the decision on the merits, provided the employer used
appropriate criteria, applied them honestly in an unbiased and good faith
way, and reached the decision which we felt was a reasonable one in the
sense that a reasonable employer could have reached it in light of the facts
available to it at the time" (at 5).
Turning to the facts, counsel argued that there was more than enough
i
,
I 27
evidence to conclusively determine that the grievor and the incumbent were
not relatively equal, but that Mr. Johnston was the superior candidate by a
substantial and demonstrable margin. Counsel argued that even if the flaws
in this competition were corrected, the employer still would have selected
Mr. Johnston as the person best qualified for the job.
In counsel's view, the employer realized after the selection committee
completed its preliminary tally of the interview and test results that
something was wrong. The interview results had failed to identify the
superior candidate, and the employer determined that it could not rely solely
on those results. Ms. Whiteland determined, upon reflection, that the scores
she had given to the candidates required correction, and those corrections
were made. Similarly, the members of the selection committee reviewed
their scores, and other corrections were mac;le. When this information was
considered alongside the information provided on the resumes and the actual·
work experience of these two candidates,. there was no doubt in the minds of
any member of the selection committee thát Mr. Johnston was the superior
candidate. In counsel's submission, even if the competition had been
perfectly run, this would still have been the result. .
Counsel reviewed the educational background of the two candidates, and
argued that any objective assessment of their educational accomplishments
indicated that Mr. Johnston was the superior candidate. While an assessor's
diploma may not be a necessary qualification for the position, counsel argued
that there was no doubt that it was an asset that Mr. Johnston could bring
with him to the job. Th~ same could be said with respect the appraisal
course. In comparison, the grievor had completed one of nine courses
necessary for the assessor's diploma. With respect to work experience,
counsel pointed out that Mr. Johnston had it, and the grievor did not. Again,
~
1
28
work experience was not a precondition to the position, but the fact that Mr,
Johnston had it and the grievor did not made Mr. Johnston a more attractive
candidate for the position. In counsel's view, a person who could sit down
and do a job with only one week's training presented certain advantages to
the employer over a person who would require six monttls' training. Counsel
also argued that the incumbent's other training in accounting, data
processing and human resources were not irrelevant to 1he determination of
qualifications and equality. In contrast, counsel suggestød that the grievor's
background and experience were not of a similar caliber,
In counsel's submission, this was not a case of over-qualification, where the
experience and skills of an employee went well beyond those demanded by the
position in question. Rather it was a case of the selectiorl of an extremely
qualified applicant, whose experience and skills were djmctly related to the
duties of the position. ,In counsel's words, being an assessor cannot help but'
make an individual a better assessors clerk. The fact tha,t Mr. Johnston had
. already done that job made him even more qualified for tl1e position.
Counsel also made a number of related submissions with respect to the
importance of the position, and the need for accuracy. In this regard, counsel
referred to the evidence and noted that all three of the employer's witnesses
testified to problems of this nature that they experienced with the grievor.
In summary, counsel argued that on the facts and the law there was no
question but that Mr. Johnston was better qualified for thEt position.
With respect to the process, counsel agreed that it was probably preferable
that marks, once assigned, not be changed. However, in this case counsel
argued that the changes were independently arrived at, and that these
changes supported the other evidence that the grievor and Mr. Johnston were
~
29
~
not relatively equal. This was not a case of collusion or conspiracy, and
counsel noted that there was no evidence of either before the Board. Counsel
argued that the evidence with respect to the change in scores, from scores
indicating less than a 10 percent difference (and relative equality) to scores
indicating a 14 percent difference (and superiority) was not determinative of
any of the matters in dispute. There was no 10 percent rule, counsel "-
suggested, and even if there was, it was not a magic number that could be
applied without reference to the facts of each case. Counsel agreed that
reference checks should be done, and personnel files should be reviewed.
However, in this case, the first requirement was effectively meUhrough the
input of Mr. Edmunds, Mr. Stover and Ms. Whiteland, and counsel noted that at
the time of the competition Mr. Edmunds was, in effect, the grievor's
supervisor, because she was working for him on an acting basis. Accordingly,
~
.it could not be said in this case that the selection committee reached its.
decision without the benefit, of reference information about the applicants. '. .
Counsel referred to the Poole decision, and argued that where interview
results are at odds with the facts, they should not be given undue weight. In
the instant case, one of the reaso~s why the interview scores were so close,
both the preliminary and final scores. was the general nature of the
questions. Because of this characteristic, the interview scores had to be
considered along with theinformatioñ in the employer's possession, and
when they were, the only logical conclusion was to offer the job to Mr.
Johnston. In the end, counsel submitted, the employer considered all the
relevant factors, and all the appropriate information. Simply put, the
competition was not so flawed as to render it impossible to determine
whether or not the grievor ,and the incumbent were relatively equal.
Accordingly, counsel urged the Board to maintain the result.
30
Decision
Having carefully considered the evidence and argument of the parties, we
have come to the conclusion that this grievance must be dismissed, but in
making this finding we are in no way indicating approval of the method in
which this job competition was conducted.
...
In our view, a careful review of the evidence indicates that the incumbent
had superior qualifications for the position in question. VVe find that the
grievor was qualified for the position - her interview, keyboard and math
scores certainly indicate as much. However, Mr. Johnston, with his diploma
in assessment, his actual work experience in the job posted, and his other
skills and experiences is clearly the superior applicant. In our view, this
finding of fact can be supported in the evidence we heard, and which is
illustrated in the resumes of the incumbent and the grievor attached as an
appendix to this .award. .
This is not to say, and we do not say .it, that there were not problems in the
running of the competition. The questionnaire, with its emphasis on
questions of a most general nature, leaves a great deal to be desired. To be
sure, the questionnaire had to be designed reflecting the fact that a large
number of applications were anticipated from individuals outside of the
workplace. Nevertheless; it hardly seems unreasonable to expect that the
questions would be more clearly directed to the position posted. Had the
employer in this case relied exclusively, or even extensively, on the results
of this questionnaire we would have ordered a rerun.
We are satisfied, however, that the employer did not rely exclusively on the
questionnaire. It also took the applicants' experience and education into
account. And when it did that, it made an evaluation' that the incumbent who
. ~~ :rí -,
-- . ,
31
.
possessed an assessor's diploma and who had actual experience in the job
was better qualified than the grievor. We find this assessment reasonable in
the circumstances.
We also find, however; thatthe selection committee erred in not obtaining
references from the grievor's direct supervisor and in not reviewing the
grievor's personnel file. These are serious but not necessarily fatal flaws in
the running of any job competition. This Board has repeatedly indicated that
supervisor's references and personnel files must be reviewed in job
competition cases. It has also held, in Vaillancourt for instance, that a
failure to review these files will only lead to the result in a job competition
being set aside where that failure "may have affected the result. Obviously,
this Board will not upset the results of a competition where the corporate
. . ,
files were not consulted when there are no grounds to conclude that the
corporate files might have altered the result" (at 7). In our view, the failure
to contact the grievor's immediate supervisor and to review her personnel
file in the instant case did not effeCt the final result in that even if her
supervisor had been contacted and her personnel file had been reviewed, we
are satisfied that the decision to award the position to Mr. Johnston would
have remained the same. Had we been satisfied that a reference from the
grievor's immediate supervisor or a review of her personnel file might have
changed the result, we would have ordered a rerun. We are not, so we 'do riot.
. .
Some final observations are in order. We do not find any evidence of
collusion or conspiracy in this case. However, we are troubled, as the
grievor must surely be, by a marking process that at one point indicated that
she was "relatively equal" to Mr. Johnston, applying the standards established
by some panels of this Board, but which later indicated, as a result of marks
being changed for all of the applicants, that she was no longer "relatively
32
equal." The fact that the questions themselves were qUl9stionable further
undermines the credibility of the process. For this, the E,mployer is entirely
at fault for it had carriage of the job competition process, and its
responsibility was not just to run a fair competition, but tl) run a
,
competition that was perceived by applicants and employees as fair. The
questionnaire and the changing of marks reflects poorly on that perception.
And for that, the employer is entirely to blame.
In the end, however, we are satisfied that the grievor and Mr. Johnston were
not relatively equal, and that the defects in process werel not of such a
pervasive nature so as to necessitate a rerun.
In the result, the grievance is dismissed.
~ ~tr Dated at Toronto tbls 27tb day of November, QQt.
William Kaplan
Vice-Chairperson
7 -
£-G~/G~ 0 ./
/'
. -
W. Rannad"fãn
~r
'~_ð,
G. Milley
Member
. .
-
I
I ... .. ~ ...--
® On1ario Foncllon Application for Employment .
Public· publlque Comn-ehllOñ Number -. N'" du C(UII:uufS.
O,.,1jJ;(.n SerVice de l'On1a,lo Demande d'emploi
~ Please PR~NT or type - DBct~lo9',}¡J'r'e' r/CJ fC{lre ~It t..£TTRE5 MOUI..EES 18-90
.--
POSltlOf'l 1ilLc- 01 'VJ}e Df WOlk SDughl ..... Titr, till poste au gflflrl! de ('"I/ail rechCfchø- M~nISUY Mm'~Je't'
ASSESSMENT CLERK - OFFICE ADMINISTRATION 06 REVENUE
-
TYiIlf! 01 oll'(Jlovme-nl desired - (jqnr~ rJ'emfl/oi désirff
X Pcrrnanenl o Temporary )ðr[olinte ' TemporóJfy fuU· $f'nf: Sumrnor 'Stud en. Co,op S.WOOn!
l.u:"JJimCm lem¡Jorl'/.ftt .1/.f!Jtt/U liar tiel rr.mfJomire " I,lcm tertii to'. ,-'mfJJVI rférc I ~ludi.lntl f~au€""dtf,Jn r:UlJoetllrHfC
Slill~ S If cunenllv emplored by The Omar~o Pubhc Servit;;e lchec.ll; ona boa only I [ Not Emptoyed by The
St.-,rul d~us I~ ,...s de:Ji fmnJayes de J.J (ønCliQII wb/ique de rOrrl.'Jttu ~Co,"/J"'1' (J11111~ulq cilsel O(Jfario Public Service
X RI!9uhir Of Proh.ðlionary G.O. TemPQrarv 0' I.jH,:I;lSs.dilM1 Ceown NOlI em ~'ut'é PM f~
fOrlClrUll pubJtqlJlI de
IMyulœt cw en IJrotJ.rion ft·tn¡'OI(11re au HDn CJð;ìSJhé C.u~UUIUI~ rOnr"rlO
Personal Data Re{lseignements personnels
FamilV Name - Nom Gillen Na.mes - P,~nom' . loj· ¡al - Jnr(Jat~ Surnamo used ~f previousty empk)yed lJt1def a dif1efent name
Nom u'¡¡,s,1 $.1 "OU.5 lit/Pi d~/Ø tr..,¡itrli~ sous un auu~ nom
PETERS UARTHA I. . STEWART
M¿ti1inU AQd'e1:S - Adre-ss. posta/It HOt'ri8 Tel-eohone Number
~ d,. rlJlphQf'JII .j Ia- ma,son 345-2184
89 FIRST AVENUE , 8ustness T~e:phone Number
B ROCl<VILU; . ONTARIO foP de télëp/tQ~ .u rra'rlðil 342-B242
K6V 3H2 Other TelephDne NumÞef
Autfe- r~urne'o de r~t~phonr
Pr'Cfeued work ~OCiUiañS - U"ul.r' d. ".v,n p,~fh~1 sl D1d you nave active aHied wllIr service?
Est·c. ~~ vous .~ez s.",¡ d~ftS leI for(<<s aJJ.h-¡ fJrnd~nl
BROCKVILLE ~.. X No 'a guerr~?
Ou, No"
LanguagM you: speak I te.d I write ... Lallgue.s p.r/~e$ I Ju~s Ilcflf~~s Do VOu h.ðve a 'tIalKJ: driver'5 Ilcente" 1'1,,,
X En91'.h :.- I Ftench OU10fl, 5P~lfv A'rIe'z-Y'Qus un permis d. COltdlJÍftJ ..-~jd') CJ.~C
Anglais Fr(ln~ilJS Au",'s Iptf'nsed X V". No
Du, No"
At. "au legally elM¡¡ible to 1 IIIofk ì-n Canada' - AVe-L°t/DUS fd dfOtl df Uifjv"¡¡I"r øu Canllda?
X V". r: No
Ou, Non
Education Etudes
Seco-ndafY sctIoot - highet' Qt-&de ar level completed ] :::';:V-I:::'~ I Type 01 co",I,C.,o o. d,ploma ,oce,yed
tcoœ i«ontIMrl - dermr. .nnh .c:hrvh 8'r1rC SUí:Cð1 CerMrc., au dipJðme Cbl."u
BROCKVILLE COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE SSGD
Post wcondary - Etudes po'tJe-crU'IdllirftJ
. Business. trldle Of 1l1c"hnical IChcJO. . X CommUnilY College Universny Other
È~o/~ cornmfl'C~/~, proføS$lottn,H. au technique- CDlf~f)f! C'ommut'duf,ire Un;~rsitl Auuf'
Di¡)Iorr'l..t. diogreG Or certilicile ComøhU8 Incompl.Q'h.!' S.pec.ialiUhon osiih,mon I..ocat~on
o,DJÕm.. gr,d, ou c.,tilic;t Ac/tfV# In.,..tJI~"~ Sø Ct~I-t...riøi1 Élablis-semem EtJdfOll
. SECRETARIAL & ST.
LAWRENCE
EXECutIVE SECRETARIAL X woror PROCESSING COLLEGE BROCKV.ILLE. ONTARIO
ST. LAWRENCE
STENOGRAPHER X SECRETARIAL COLLEGE BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO
COMPUTER 1 YEAR
PROC~reR X COMPUTER SKILLS SENECA COLLEGE \HLLOWDALE, ONTARIO
Ott"t'f ¡;our5e'5, wor...:stloøs. st!nllOar$ - Auff!'"S COU/-'i. a/~ht:fSr s~mllldllØJ
INTRODUCTION TO LOTUS 1-2-) WORDPERFE':T 5. ° ¡,tORDSTAR
LOTUS TIPS & TECHNIQUES PAGELASER 12 TRAINING (OSHAWA)
REAL 408 EFFECTIVE SECRETARIAL SEMINAR
PUBLIC RELATIONS COURSE (OSHAWA)
Pro'e!l.'StorUII Qualihc, uions. j~c.enCe1i, membetships - Tilr.S, "lfiliowonJ tr celt,f'-c-ørs p'Øftnio'lllcl$ t I..u,ng O'gon...,,,," - O'g.n"me
Employment Emplois
f...... 4~mulr}vrn(~' relercnccs may we C:Ot'll.J.Cl your prtnllll. 1JIT'l lloyef ~ X Yes No Fgnucr cmplovori'¡J' V", No
fll.'tlvrm'Ö IIiW~ crmli"'.er wItte f.·mfll0~t~ur .tNm,If} Ou¡ NIIII VClJf(~ '¡U5: .ltlc;¡mtsl emt)I()III~lI,j.t:~) OIJl NUll
Olhl"~' Pli..'".....e lij),,-"Cily
o .j,"II·-; r j.,s(/m'~·s} 1"'H~(I~ lIe ItI(."usl.·rl
Prl!scnl/ tast POS~Clon lille ar\d ClaS$ltlcilllon It ,l nDI~(;iltJle N<lll\(! and aCl-eJrMS ot en,ployel - NOm Iff ",((n'He de 'cmnlolleul
1,ttr' th·j Ila.-iff' iJf.."'ucl: p('é~,y.d~tlr cr CI.J5SJ!¡c""J/'rm S ·,1 I! ð /Ir.:v HINISTRY OF REVENUE
ACTING SECRETARY - OAG 6 2479 PARKEDALE AVENUE
Peuod 01 emølovment :- Péflode d'~mpIOt 1 P,...", { I.., .ala<v BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO K6v 3H2
7t;"teme¡II "C'l/t"' l..loLl' derwl.·'
From· de JTH em(,lm
1..%2/05 PRESENT 14,64/hr
Reason to, lea~ng - R/t~5Q" d, 'IIOlt, ddtMIl Name Df sUperv.SOl TclC'¡Jhol1e - T~'~hon~
Nom lh~ VOIrf.' Ju~r'ri'lS("r.tf I
J.T. ED~tuNDS 342-8242
Dul'~'5 : Aespon'5lbihlles ... Foncr'rJl'1S I 'CSIJOnSdh'-' I~S
CONFIDENTIALITY, SENDING OF S.Cm:DULED REPORTS. OPENING. RECORDING AND DISTRIBUTION OF MAIL,
DISTRIBUTION OF PAY CHEQUES, PROVIDING SECRETARIAL ~;ERVICES TO TilE REGIONAL ASSESSMENT
CO~~IISSI0NER AND ~~NAGEHENT STAFF, ANSWERING PHONE CALLS, RECEIVING VISITORS, FILING, COLLECTION
OF DATA, TRAVEL ARRANGEMENT, TilE ABILITY TO WORK UNDER PRESSURE AND MEET DEADLINES.
'- --
11,,.:(' ¡rlfi2 In..~... t 1,821
, API? 2 ..
.
? !g~
~
. ~!
LYNOCtl J. JOBNS'lœ
1938 Featherston Drive
ottawa, cntario
!UH 6PB
(613) 739-1143 (H)
(613) 739-2240 (W)
EIXJCATICNAL BACKGRa.JND
1989 - current The Canadian Red Cross Society,
French Language Training (intermediate level)
1988 - current Algonquin College, ottawa, Ont.
Two year Human Resqurces Management Certificate
1985. St. Lawrence College, Brockville, Ont.
Fundamentals of Accounting AC01, AC02, AC03
(approx. half CGA designation)
1984 Queen's universitI' Kingston, Ont.
Economics course 02. .
1984 University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Appraisal course 101 (completed academics for
. Certified Residential Appraisers designation).
. -
1984 Loyalist College, Belleville,Ont.
Graduated with a two year Business Diploma in
Assessment, Appraisal and Real Estate
Management.
1982 Athens District High School, Athèns, Ont.
Secondary School Graduation Diploma,
June 1982.
EMPIDYMFNl' HIS'lURY
August 1988 - The Canadian Red Cross Society (Head Office)
current . SUpervisor, Compensation and Benefits:
* Supervise the operation of the Compensation and
Benefi ts unit, servicing 17 Centres, 10 DiviSions
and National Office
* Assist in the development, implementation and
maintenance of the new Human Resources Management
Information system by 1iasing with the Computer
Services Department, preparing system
documentatibn, provide training to all affected
personnel
. p,,·...~~III'!O.I)O$lhOn I.tlc Em llo, Iln-.,;;~d(m( N,IPII' ;lIul , 'll:U'''~ ~I! ~'~ql,f"",,,· ',c·"rll:: .I':r,......i' (Ii> 1'".,,··/ '-,,'llt
MINISTRY OF REVENUE ,
CLERK/RECEPTIONIST - 3 2479 PARKEDALE AVENUE
. I-"~T" '~l ul EmplOV1ncnl .... ~r orle d't!I"I 'a; I F"':'2~.'~'; / h :'.,,',.,,'"'" ~ BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO
I HlIlI I11I I To ~'~SENT K6V 3H2
85/07/03 --
~;:Ull lor hlêlv1ng - Ra'SOr' (iP. "CUft:' rlr.¡".,,( NilllI.~ nt ~~. Ì~'vIS{1j T I '~.,: I~nlln' :r"/r'!'I'r""
Nnnr ,Ii' VIJ/UÞ :l-lI/J<,.'TVI ~~'l¡¡ I
PROMOTION TO ACTING SECRETARY C. HATTHEWS 342-3242
---
D~llj(~'S . rcsponsihilillCS . FrJ1IC:lrrmi / '~~/JO lsah'¡llC5
ALL SWITCHBOARD DUTIES. PROVIDING TELEPHONE AND RECEPTION SERVICES TO THE STAFF AND PUBLIC
(õperating a 7 line system), ASSI,MBLING OUTGOING MAIL, TYPING, FILING, R-PLANS, RECORDING
ALPHA INDEXES, FRS SHEETS, QUESTIONNAIRES, STUFFING MEN FORMS, APPRAISAL CARD S , MAKING
APPOINTMENTS FOR ASSESSORS, TYPING MEMOS AND LETTERS FROM HANDWRITTEN MATE:l.IAL, SETTING UP
TIMES FOR OPEN HOUSES, TRAVEL CLAIMS. TRACKING, DATA ELEMENTS, NAE ·SCREEN
--- _____~........__c.__ ____T_.........--'-r---.. _ __ --
Pt.-YI1IUS 1....¡'l.III('lr1 win . Ellrf'J~" I rt!r:-¿'d~u' /\I,m'\o' ;"Hj i.li~lj~l.~'" (I' l·jllpjjIV!" .'V.}, Ii '1 dr/"·' \1' rf~' '..·.'i II".·, '"I
mNISTRY OF REVENUE
ACTING SECRETARY - OAG 6 2479 PARKEOALE AVENUE
PI·...n.llI~ ¥.1l~~II()vrm!'nL I¥I/fuft' "~.·m'IIUI r"o's,,,,,,, r,.ut!_·/lU-'1I' ¡:w", BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO
f-""II,/1' IT08~/l2/31 K6v 3H2
88/06/01 --_._--_._-~--
B'·I ·.HlI 101 h';JvlIlq n¡'i!õIUl (It." 'H1"'i~ rli!/~111( N<"I...· f'd '5.u~..:tvl~ur 1 ..I, 'i j. ~ I{ l' ,j i,,'··..¡I·(I··,
,Vi"t1 Ii, > ~ u/,,' ~"/1." t' ~,.,{t I
ACTING POSITION DURING MATERNITY LEAVE J.L. PAYNE 735·0181
-....---. -
Dullcs / 'C''S~)ons.ll)i'lhes .. Forjcrior;$ I (~Sllons,lt>i/iI6s
CONFIDENTIALITY, SENDING OF SCHEI)ULED REPORTS, OPENING, RECORDING AND DISTRIBUTION OF ~~IL,
DISTRIBUTION OF PAY CHEQUES, PROVIDING SECRETARIAL SERVICES TO THE REGIONAL ASSESSMENT
COHMISSIoNER AND MANAGEMENT STAFF I ANSWERING PHONE CALLS, RECEIVING VISITORS, FILING,
COLLECTION OF DATA, TRAVEL ARRANGEMENTS, THE ABILITY TO WORK UNDER PRESSURE AND MEET DEADLINES.
.in Ihi, $Celioo relate VOU( skWs and work ØlIi >e'"ence. i '1ctudi "lg any vol-unlœer wGr ,:, ", thl! Ql,Ial.licaElons 01 me P{I$IIIOn for ""hlCll ,"au die aLHJI....'"Çl ~,I~.;I\~I·, ." 1.1.t'IJ"
~ht~;\'i ,jlI:!Ii ¡-equitqd~.
o..m." (:CUIt sr!clIon. decri'rlel l,Iutre e1/Je.f1enC~ ~, ~os al1liturJe:s professionneIJes. .,. COnlp'rS Ie (MIf.,ji( b~névI}J~. IMr r;JD(/!.II"t iJrJl( qu/fJue.r: feQUiS,,"S paUl Ie POS/i· 'N'.· ,'j,I,·
pclst~i/CI ~/Ci;mlie d'alllfe!i leullle-.r: .Ill bc.s:uml.
.. ---- --'
Prout of .age lJod. ø-l'OOI of el~gibLlilv 10 walll i" Canad¡J w;n be (eQu-irecl bclore app.olnlment.
011 Hlqg,"'if rlu camiiditl, av;tllt I'engagemelll. ulIf~ rHCVlle de SQn åg8 f( Uf'lr! P'C-UVC- fte- .lOr, ;tdrnli5I.Oj,/Ju) .1 Irilv.JIIJtr ,JII C¡mltt/.J
,.. NDte: 8t:Ciluse some of lhe la-clars in the :pleccd~ng iSCllQRS are jOQ ,eQulfemenlS le.g:, lo'a~...cI ¡IIIVI:' ~ 1......~~IÇf: IJlfJl"':"''';I(}lliii llçl'mces el'\tlElemE!'nl EO. er'i'1fJlo"'Il-..r~1l1:
d~'Qualillc...tion of $ame or c:h,m~ In status nlaY result In reass.lgnment Of lermmahOr. 01 (!'mp;O\lmenl
Þ> Not..: ltaul dQrUld- qUl'" Cf'rtfio'lS t;[I!S ,.enseigncltfCnls ;;,-deSSu$ SOllt diU exigfu,c;c'I ¡; '(Unplo. 1,!hII'" "-'I pC;/ffl't. dl' r:rmrh.."p "3¡,d~. ~·e"'J16C;Jt$ 1)'lJff"s>~.~"1 ~"J,~
<lutorisario" d. l1avalll un. di,qU,fJMieiWCI'J 011 un changen~ttt de- SI.tJut pCllt enrrair~Cf vii rriJnst,~" Du unit c~,ua/'QI1 d",ttWm.
- -
I Iu)u!'hy declare that the 1ofe'going inlolmalio-n ï$ £".IÕ and c:;omplele to my lI;:nowled1~e. H;j...."l' YOu anilc,",~~d ¡In ad,lillo,'a! Snil''!!-1 f~SW"r'!e-'
11 I(h~rSlancf £hal oil- fal5S $1,¡Uerllenl may disQuali.fy me hom cmp~DVmcnt. 01 cau5.e my c¡smlssa~ A ...,:~ VOIII¡: ol,t''''" ~Ii IU ~' II-!\,JII:<: 'HJ[J{Jf ,.. '.
J,! ¡otllSlgnéf eol .atteost~ pM 18 préscntt' Qu. IC$ fet1sr:u9r1emems ci-deJsu$ .sOnt. ~utam QUi} tltJ ,:urFicul/lnt VIrile} OU, I.'."
Ir-' h,," !,.1cht!, CDmrNcrs ., viil;S. ¡s.",.."". ~ 0.'0 -
J,.. <t",~"."ds qu'un~ fauSs. d'¡cl.,.t.on p.ut .nlfa;/lO( I, (.jet d. m. d.m.nd. OU mil" C f7, . ~ ~
...."yr'd,""..,". /Í (2.oL; ,d j p _. lJ: !
.nformaEion tequnted ¡n this appUcatio., i. tr.,..'ed canf~dentjaUy Le.s "'n$"¡~p1"mltna donnÓ$ Sur Ctl formula;,.. sont consid,y-. comme cOfJlidefJ(Ù..ts
¡:;O' ollicl'! U'$C - R~serl'~ a rusdge du blJtceau
"
I -
.
.
. , PAGE -2-
-.
* Develop and recommend policies and procedures
regarding issues related to Compensation and
aenéfits admdnistration
* Organize presentations to assist all levels
of training in departmental meetings
* Authorize all personnel data processed by the
'- Compensation and Benefits unit
* prepare and monitor departmental perfonnance
appraisals
May 1987 - The Canadian Red Cross 'Society
A1:lgust 1988 Regional Cœpensation and Benefits' Clerk:
* prepare verify and process all salary and
benefits related documentation for new hires,
terminations and status changes for approximately
5000 Red Cross employees
* Provide advice and counselling to employees and
supervisors on compensation and benefits rela~ed
matters, including orientation interviews.
* Prepare appropri~te reports for billing purposes,
. manually and from a computerized ~nefits system
* Maintain an accurate brought forward system for
salary increases, department appraisals, probation
reports, etc.
May 1986 - Rideau valley Conservation Authority,
May 1987 Accounting Clerk:
~ Maintained a fUll set of personnel and
accounting records (computerized and manually)
which included accounts payable and payroll for
a staff of about 50 people.
~ Performed ather administrative duties inc~uding
reception, typing, filing and other office
functions.
* Prepared monthly financial reports for
reconciliation of accounts payable
I
I
.
. .
. .
, PAGE - 3
Dec. 1985 - C.A. Fitzsimmons & Co. Ltd.,
Mar. 1986 Real Estate Appraiser:
· Appraised various types of real estate
including residential, conunercial and industrial.
~ Completed in depth analysis to cpmpare
different types of property to dE!termine
the market value.
,
1984 - 1985 Ministry of Revenue
Assessment Clerk:
* calculated assessments.
* Learned and operated the OASYS system.
-I< Assisted in wri Hng programs for the IBM
computer system.
#< Assmned responsibilities of Assessment Clerk
for a six month leave of absence which was
extended to one year, gained knmrledge of all
assessment policies and procedurE!s.
1984 Townsman Realty Ltd., Real Estate Sales,
. Appraiser:
:
* Completed real estate appraisals and sales
while working towards a Certified Residential
Appraisers Certificate.
-I< Wrote computer programs to implement the
financial system and real estate data
onto an IBM system.
1982 -1983 Rideau Regional Centre, workshop Instructor:
* Supervised handicapped patients in workshop
and outdoor activity.
* Managed a market garden
-I< Summarized a task analysis to assist the
patients in performing functions in the
workshop.
REFERENCES
References available upon request.
;>;"
- }!
-! rHIYH~'I!' ~)Q'5illion U11~ fml1irti precedellt N':UUI' ~md 1~1~111'~:) ·01 pmpl . -r ^' ....;- "="-
. - t: , q~., -- Çl-i"~~:~~~~~~ ~r.....\(~ . '."~~~'; N: \.
R.e...1... E~~ ì'f.prp~ ~ ~c;. .. - _
~ "n"d d" I· . O~O,D..,v;.~· ~
~ \"'I.d Il~ Enll~IQ.Vlncnl ..''''U (! ~.·'H/JfO' Fm;11 S..brv Tt.I"I"~Io·nr IUhtf
r""'O~(~5 r·"~M-. ¡k>,CCO
~~In fl)( 1-l.:¡I...i~I!~ Arll~'m~ (fl,,'I':"It," $Ieµ,"'r N-lI1u' nf .. ,.", .,...~II
I - U, \. r~.I."lll"".. rt~/r~plllJ/"<
Ap(HO.l.Ao.t l':ufO-,fTr.:¡A CiC:S'<'O ¡;~""~:Go H 2~L- -=f-¡t"S
D'llot~... 11~·.~IUO·'lll,hlll~~ FunC'''¡lI<'' -' "·,'iIIl/Jl£<lI,,"','.\ - ----
ApPf'~ 1.1.<..... ,4>.....1...'] *1 Pto ó.¡... n:.~Q p-.~A....~<l. _!..... cl4d.4 r-~~¡£:",il.
~ 0:, ,...",.....,,1 (.,c.J. '"t ¡ '\d...f..AA"f i' ;0..0
~ c.b-rrvf~IQ)':'~ .f> d.-r>-p.t/l. Q.......~"'.L-y....w -h C..~.....p<-¡.Æ~.. &1.,1'';;'''-''.1 +7po-? D'¡: pr~~.t"
--k c.l.. \!.:+<.( i'''1l.~1. ,.J-h.<:.. /YI.a,.." kÔ U ........~........
- p'~pcUo.Si....C!Å..... c...¡",-"-'p rU"lf;U<41 ;J~. rCfl 0 r t:J .f& { <vy:)p.;-c,..i-,..;J !1 pf!.,.. f',c..o.·h.¿....-. .
P,··...llu.... 11U"illlon till!' E" ."/Oj /l'éC~!/t~"t N.m l.~ 'lllI! ;~'.!d1 p~>" u~ I'n IpIINI' r-.¡-;;;'-:;;;;;;;;;,~~~d-;:;:'-:;;:;;:.~' -.- --, ~
Ass e..lY.I .t (...\<2..1 lL f-1 ," ,::,1t\:j Ù ~ ,Qv..rCA"'\.......c.
rrv.,¿ '-\ Fro,s ".' s -{1"V.N I:l ç.:.{!.-4-
~1'~111111l)j C~III)IQ"'.I1lCI11 Pt.:""I,d~ fI'f.'rt'JJloi ¡ri""1 S.I¡uy , r,""mnom Fin" >........1-"-; ¡:l..-< f.....- d n-1.J2 fl"ue
f""" "" ¡ro... -1"_ f,-oc:\::.....II<-,(vJ..
N..,; 'i~ Ne>" ~S 'lbe.- ~ hr.
U"I'''ll1~' (}r It'<~'Vln9 R¡IIWII' .h· vn/r(l-r1r.~iJ.1'r . i\I;llll~~ 01 " or,' r -------- --.-----
-fò í ct. ..ul;~. ... ~(J T"I~I't1~J~II' h'f~"/I~!Ilrl/'
~r(>~q '(~Lf';^'.t -:;:t;~~ ¡"-..v<-. ~';'."':;;~''''''ä;'~. j 3'\2· S;¡,l(~
D',IIC'5, rcspm,sltlt!llle'!¡ -. FO,I,r'O,I.$ / fCSOOflS<Jorlircs -
.. c~..... 1 c..;.J.o.lt....d 11 s~ .~.~()"TV.....L'
- .-e....'-..........'-':..d a.."''-« o-p.....I'~ '-(/úi.. OA~ "'IS S'1 s .,4~rYl .
- A:,.~.. ~,¡..e..:;A '''....... f, G::r..t¡ PI' Ð'Jr<:vn-.o ~ r Lo~ ~ j:;l-:..rn
- ho..~c1 1"01 'i\.1-~' e..A -H- Q~ ~ .o....A" :c...- 0...;-(...
, / . d. J .., . _ ,..,v-..t/-, (~
- C!.4c.......Mt.4 tq<Jp¡;,....!i,b,I./~ 6f fI..~e..a.A,,'<lJ'<· C/P.J~<.... hi a..~, I ð~
. o.-F. <~ u..' ....'-LV\ t.~ CI.O e.<:.1.s--Ct:l..~ ..,.Ð 0 N!.. tJ Q9-"; Cj <'.......~..t !<- n,.(..W '-..!J. fJf'-
i rW~,..<:<5IY"'..At (lD!.«..,(>>;]. <:>........d (Jr6C.J..dU,A..Q.-'> __
~:~~ ~c:~q~t~;~~~ 'fQur sk,U'S and work ek.pftrlUnCe. ncludn~g any volun1ett' work, to the Qlhillilic.¡nioHs 01 th·.~ PO:iLlllm ~QI wIllen "OU ide a¡":',¡Jh,iIl9 l allac., .jJ(J(''101JUdl
D..w.'t¡ r:,,·ue .:toL"crro,.. dfir;rlveT It'c',e e-~"ér¡enctt er vos rtpll(udes pro!eJs.lonlleHes. y camp,,:S Ie 'fltYi'ff hr!ne C)I' ~p t ' é ..
llo(J,'\.(íJ({'L liuindr<f! d'RUf'~s feutlies ~u be.scHld v 1;, {}.lr r fJar .fJ1,,. quøht s (eQu'~~s POut Ie JQ${I,' (JuC YOul
:r ........,..., ~ ~~..ut' rV) =- Hc../"7"".'-f;:lÆ) ~<Jl.~~ ~,~.
II"\......~ '~A'\-' Sl.-fV--p~' h c:::. S"..¿:J.uvI~~ P~l a..--'c{ -+t~.~r<J.. ~.
:~ho..t J ~ c.l..g...Q e rf.....â ~ ·w ,.:¿./1 ~je-U a:-r"\..CJ h n...-t.""t. C\. c.t\. L t,¡ Q.~ 'õ.:5oo
t>C~Q/\ ~....oJ,~ ~I¿,,\',-\-,M _ f".--., pf'eJ,J'~PO.$I"¡~L;"'",-<" h~ (f\.c.Lu-~
-I- ... . ..J _ r. r. Û u.J. - Jl./ /----
~C <:,.....................'-'3 a-......a Uf'P rCt.vlìrs...6 u..I 'v'l '11\1(!1.'¿ ~J ................ Tf...'J J µ...>.......
l"~ ...¡..., ~ Ai:J;¡..¡~~rm c-r,-.¡t-l".d.< ".o...(u...frL(..."..-v::; Q4l&( CJ>--F"v ~,¡,Q..7
VJ t"¡ I-¡ -rlv.. e..ùoll.lA.+~ O.{: r~ fl ~¡:;urf~
M:!J fÐSa~ó<¡ t;:,+: (}s:;:<'..A~~ C/'?.rt e. '1.~J..;¡k.A lÎ,<. ...L. fJ ~ '~~"""f-'.Þ'\c:..f(
......---."" '-'., -...... ,'r, 'IN.. ßrccr..J-) . \II!: I Il~ e~rruú' eU.....( G. ,- c>. 0,""'- ~':>-A/J "fe.f"""', .b.h'·\ 'J 'tÁM
'1t.r.1.t .L ,}µ.,ct.{1:j t~(l.~ '-IN... re4~öns..,b¡/~+/(,J ef' ".J') fb..se.~~«'-'VÚ Cler~
m~""h., 1~ ""-00 ~,,;I,f...c¡ 7~ Assf? ~µ: ,1', ~a~Lt.~ f'/"'przrl-¡e., cr..nd ~-,,- /~
C~f2lþto... PfÐ'JI'r>-r-fV" -A,.. '"'t-h?. t..(::.~ <::,!:j~~"""'" .~ _~,
PUJrl1 01 aqe and D'oof 01 Chglb~hlY 10 WOlle. in Canac"'l wjlllH~ feQllirp.d before M'! ')Qintr'l"tcnl
_~" ,-'x./yr·t,., rtu cilruÞdit( .1v..trlt l'e,ry.lyt:tnCllf, ~"'L' ¡J,/:'VIIC de SOft ¡iQe e."l vntt prCU'r1e út! san 'aa/t),.<;SdJ¡h¡t ,f "rl".IIJJ~!/ .,1.' C;JIi;t(/,l
,.. No~"': i1u(::;'l'~"I; 'i.I')II1f!- nf tI~C f;. {':~ )(':i ~n Ihl~ lH~~lJr1ill~~ ~I!r:t.ons ,ue jot) reou;''OIl)mll5. ll:_~'_ "'iti~d Itll....I~1~.::;::~~~.~.~~ I,I.I~I'~;~.'; .~lltl:~j'l1a.nl i:; 1.:~lnl:'.~I~,:-.-~-~-
cl"'¡'(lIw¡j 1C.'UIUll 01 :t.uTle or r.h-;lngl! ~n S.~':HUS m.;~~ r\,!SI.lt .n reil5s~ÇJnme-nL 0' Icrm~U.l~l( l~ 01 +,'l1 l~U\'r1l'~I~~ . . .
I!Þ- NOI.'1: till'" _(/or.I"~ !JUl.' Ct'rt,l,nS des .'"rll$(!I(I"~o".·I}/$ C'-fh-'~·-'~vj SQIlI rj~s clÚgeric.ø"$ d'eflll'IQi IJJ,,' ','~. J)("u,I,'Ç" (}I' ¡;,'!/,.-t.,u,' ~"¡JI'p c"rtdJ(;I~ Iff ,..,_. ,¡...~..wt\
""'0"_',"")11 cf(' "'iIl".).JI. U~Il.· C!tlf/tl.·rldlc.1rrOII 0./ .,,, C'i"I'I"I~t'II.." ( de sriJtvl nt".lt "r1(r¡"j;,j,." IJ'1 !1.til~'I<" ~'I' Ull.' fi':'~,JI"';~' ;J'~.}Ii;)Ù" . . f ' ...,
I ~11~II!h.,. docl.l¡-e ¡hat lht! lorC-(joil1lJ inlorm¡:llion IS HIIC' and COmp~elc to O1V 'IIoo-w1edg H 1\1' , _ II" _~ , _ . . / .uu~_
t 1Il1\1(·1S1/JIIl:llh.l1 .jII- ¡Jlse 5.tiJWmCf1.1 may dì$(¡uahly "Ie hOln Cn\DlovmCllI. 01 causa mV di:~l.Ssa. 'l'''''':' ~;:;:.:I,r¡-' :~.:I::l~ .~.::,,~~~~.~:_'¡:;:"~~:':;,i¡::;~"l 1I:~U1I~I.'" v:
.11.. ,~( li~siqfJclp.1 .1tre~'tt po1;' 'A ¡HeS(JOrlf qu~ Jcs rrNtS~'_t'¡i'elt1C/tl.S â.t1i!'sSUS st:J.ñJ. U'3~U QlAI' f.U ,.wm_I}·wn ",I.d!;' Ii..
W ". .r;"Cht.'. .:{lmp~elS~' liNUS, _ . _ ~'!l~ .11111: ~- -------- "
.J.. Ul/rl/t".,ml, 'I" ""e /~"ss" d.<I""",oo I'.'" e"""i"., I" ,e,., <I. "" aem.",'. 0" "",,, .' .
""ul"""~m,,,' . ntßf:n-l~'('''12 Jtpr ~ I ~íJ .
InformRtlOn fQC' u8SCud in [his ßpplication ¡s "enrod C:On'ichl'ntlaUy LlII's rD'ns-It'g e f oJ .. ~ fl" . - ~~. ---:
- I " '"fin a: uOl1n..,.s Jur c~ o"'nl m~~ sonl cOffs¡-ddfm COiIItH('! ca"fù'Junrle/s
rlH nliicc uS!.! u nð-sl!r...~ d I"usage du bureau ~ -
___ ----------------____n.____,~_~__
. ~ntariO ~oncllon
Public publlque Application for Employment I com;':'; NU;~ ~"N'~d;:;~ ~
0....·,0 Sen.iee . de 1'0nlarla Demande d'emploi
. . P'u...·PR1NT 0. trP. - O,wvIOQ"nhier ou ~crir.. on LETTRES MOULÉES
Pi)Sluon iii ~c 01 'lYpe of ¥IIutk s.oUgt\1 - TJ(le du (JlHt~ 01,1 gf!nre de travelJ t[lcfle'c/lé r''''''VR~::~c- , --
,
!l::;£e...Jt)meAJf Ckft.
T:zl emplov",.n. dcsi'cd u Ge",. d'e",pJoi do..,,! -
úr/1:lan.t'!'Il[ U T(!n'~IOi.ill(V parHII' '1C T E!'mpOr;Jtv r~ 1l ~IIIlC' Swnmc! SlurJ-c('\[ Cooop 5Iud~f1l
f'1.·fJ'.i;I i.·¡Jr U.'JI I'UfiIIfL'i) Jmnps Jlrlf'rt"' 't!UIJUJr.1J{t' .i ß/(.'rll ((.·mfJ5 t· fI{.lm ""elf! ICfcH1,¡u,' 1,',iur.'¡I/OlICUl,JPiYiJi..·t"
SI~llIlS II cuuenlly cmn.oyed tJv The Onl~flo Public Service Icheck one 1>0.1 onl¥~ I ,A.;, .-.. ~ ",,-
S',l/lIl rJ"~ lj h· CHS nf!J r.mlllo'lés de /.1 fom:ttan pó.ltJI,'1ue d~ I'OntHflit ICacnet ,me Jeu/e ca.sel OntallQ P"bhc Serv~c('
RC'9ul.;u Ot Probal~Oñary G.O. Tcmporarv or urClas~irled Cluwn Nun employe pal J~
fO,'''IIO/I put~¡,qLJe Oe
Rti.rllJh'~f VlJ ~,. ¡"ubi:l(/on (t!mJt(}'imc.° Ou HQn âilss¡/j~ CfJlI(Ulllr~ ¡"OnrarIO
Personal Data Renseignements personnels
Fi:nni-ly Name -"+ Nom G..,en Names - Pr~fI(}m.f h~ 1..,1 - ~w'f¡itJ~ 5 urnarne lJSCG It pre...lously ~mploved under a o.Ut!'f1::n.1 n...n It'
1-'-) (', d Q'f) S NUlfl utl/,st} SI "'OlJ~ .....'(}l rJeJd ~t.h'iJ'-{i~ ~O-l.l$ In ,~vltt! llum
:roh(\S~
Mi.lil~"n AdllrC:=:5- .- Arl,esse IJUstale Home T e~c:phonl! Numbi(tl
Iq~ß. ¡:: u;:l.. .¡W sitm 1::lr\·,,~. N" de 1~I~pllU"e 81. m....on ~9-1/'t]
Oî\o...,-~ OA-It,.,.(cr -Su~ness. T elotpnone ","umber
k /[1 bf><D /'.¡D dl: lc/~pholle ,¡Jv (r¡J Vi1tJ 713'1- ;û. 't ù
*(wish ~ mo"¡e.. hack. ft., "8rcc\é..,,·,lk) Õther Te~ephone NtJlT'ber q::z. y - ,;;¿:;A Þ
.AufU~ niJméf'o de re{~~hollt!
PleletrOd work locations - L,~ul..-I de I(JI~ðJJ "'I'c'~rt!!sl Old you ha\iO aCUve .¡¡,Jlied war sen"lce~
E5'·C~ C1u~ ....OU$ a"~1 u'v,- dans /e$ fO,.Ct!1S ðl/¡é~s penOdf')'
tsroc,J..\JiI~ , .. 0'1'1 (L.,...X..... ~.. [..1\ (} (4 guer,e)
Ou' NOfl
Languages you speak J (ead I wr~¡e - l.iJngtles pdr/~~s I lues / ~r:"'øs Do you hallc a val"d drive¡-', licence' rm
, ...,(ngli.h :VFt.""h (11\'<I"""¡ 4,1< I Olhe,s. spgcily Ato-el·...."lIS un ¡J~Tmr$ de ~ondu (e ....alide' ChHS[1
Anglais Ft.",... Je.<J<!.\ Ac.tues Iptl!tciSl'I~ vr.. No &.
Ou' NUll
Arl! yOu ~I!gall'f e-l~gible to work.n CI"'ada~ - A..-..l·..-O.....s k ,,,oi, dt!1 tr..1I8JJlef øu C"'ifdit.'
. -4.. No
Ou, Non
Education Étude:s
~-econdi!l.ry schoo~ - highesl grade Of lellel comDje1w l LOC.;:;~:i'" I Tvp. 01 cp",',c.,. O· ~'plom. 'ec..ve~
[COJ" s~conrj.,rt - d~rni~I' "l'mde tJche..-~e ...øc SUCr:e1 Ct!ttlf/CJ( av tJltJtõme OJ)It,J'nV
l~. C..cI'V'CJJ.. !S.J..1. :nV¥1
?QSl $1I(;O""O..r". - ÈlI,Id". prJ.$u"éQndiJlf'e"s ~mmYn.tv COllege
SUi1nee.. tri!llde 01 te':hoic:a¡ $(:hQO~ UntVefSllV Other
Ècole r.omn"f.(;~I.~ prQ'.ssirJn( ~J~ )u rttchniqlJ. CoIllg. cgtnnte,mð"I,,,. Um..-'t$.jf~ AuUð
Oiploma. deç rlo or '.niHcat-a Compl.t. I""ompl... Special-izition ¡'n$litutio,n locatIon --
DjlJlõm., gl,dl1 øv c,ni'ic..r A~hell~ fn.lchev4- SfJ~C;aJi$øl,()tI ÊratJfJssetne"t Endloit
~'it"-OO~ ,Af'P~nJ( ~5P.....cß~.( L..'::;!.{\,.\..;;.·~ C.O 1\U:¡ <",
"'~""Es{...:t..c.. V e.J\~";, ik . e>^~ 8,e;1.C>J ,~IE: . ° "'0I-0....;¡
/o.{~
'l.J...~-1..Ç.~i Gu-..V"~ Pc",.........x:.o.!1 Br OL't..., Ik,
f\~'<ÀL<t{'/I/ ¡:.,... (élTl\ ') V Sl. ~<,e.r"<,,,~
l';. ~ f.r:.aCr<-"ICl..l ,/ C...."'i"'^ cq.....'oq to Ar~c-....q'-'-:Tl o-M"'--' ú.
~ l)..o«¡"a.l.<J...., ,?e...... ,¡:>..t-,
O;htt cOu"". ,""o",,,,p', ..""na" - A",/r" cour.. .reJ~.. J~I""'."" ~
F'f"'U\.~ 4iU"'r- -h^~ ~ I/V~.I'''~ (evd. ,- -r/I.Þ. C~,rt............. ~ ~ 5
"--r-r.~"'__"'.~r '.--_ ----.-.. ppp~~. (J><.NV- 10(. ~ c.~'('.J..o.s,( O"'c...:.....d...<=V'N.~ r..., -.l...fl:/t"'.<4 .ç".,.,. C>e.r~-'.{;l?-& ~,~
£c-ÐnÐ1""'CA c:.~~ t'='L ~~ d.e4li,.,o."$.\. .
..š,"1l\.L ~.J I.iJ c f t..e,/u)f)
P,ol...ional q".lilic"Km.. Ii..,..... "","'ll.rmop. -. rO"e.. .,IM~I'cn. ., .or"Ii..r. p'ol...,<'nneJ, !1S$u,ng O'gani,a"on - Dlg.ai,me .
t2<'A1E.":>~':"16. /'ce","'<"·1ô!.. - ~<:J 12..1:__1 c~><Jl~ ßW'f'.(J... ~fr,
Emplovment EmpJoís ./' .t-{..
For mu )lovme l~ rclNl!nce!i. mily....e conla't vO~" nrcsenl eln '}IOVfl~ VYe. No Farmer cmployer!$I) No
I', I"V~"'~· rIH' ~ i'onf.4ctrH Vi fr~ r4'inpla"'L'j¡r ole '1Iel) Ou' Nln' VitI"'! V~J:C! .'ilr.t:'uj sf ~n'fJh.J"'~"f'¡ sl) Ou, Non
.
011 ~.., -; l ?":'151~ 'SIH:Cdy
Q,.ljJt ·.... fU·'.'Î/I/"'f·"-} It''''':'fl! lit! fJl£'t.·'_'it·fi
Prkl'oe:cl{ / la$t pQlltico lilie and c.lílSI.flclart~on it .appj'cjJb~e Narne and addreSS of emSJllJvel - Nurn cot íJdress~ a(: "~mpio'(ev'
Tlttf' flu ¡JOSlØ tlcruct : tJl~cédctH et cl.u.$iI¡C~li{jf1 s·if I' d lieu ~S('o.. f\'1,~ Vrji'
.5"l.~,¡.~·e"" C~I\9:cluO'-¡ ..¡PC..{t'~JfM~'~ 1l:{(YI;/JI~(Æt\04Î . ~INI C~/,.....(I..,~ f2a..} c...r c,'> &,<;" ..<..~
, ~~"" A I-I.v \J, ">1"" b'." e...
Pp" 01 "",pl.,vm"'" ";' ~"od" d·.mn/o' I P,...nl ( I.., ..10'. C'-t'\n..oV <" , 0 "'~w
Tr"'t~"""" oc,,,.I/ ..., II."".,
f~oll' dl!' To·:J em,Jlo K 1-6' 't-S ~
--""<Lot, I-r-:+ c........l' t~ ;).. ~O
A(!dSOn lor leaytng .... fI..,solJ de ","OUf: d~J)iJtt A..d {j.. c'. ^' ~~,(" N.&1Il'IC of superVlsar TOIOOho.nl!l· - TtJ~phone
"!: 0rfT\ ,:!;;;-i Il e........idr..~~ ..;I...J.i\J1, . '-'S .. Num rIp' vat";! SIIOVrW.'f.t!lJf I "1?/\...2.¡ ~;l
·I:-v.;(.vJd "t<. ,¡"~Tl:o",,C\l'."I\v tlx,·,<<n<õr1 r:!k/<:..\;:.I<f· 11"\ Pc.II: «0:\ d k
Out-es f RC'5 )QI1SiDIII jC's n ortCllonsl "~~fiUlJ~itlJll'(~J ß,r.:.C KÙ'·II~
.. .r(l("....~.¡~/I cc.H.. ?D..o1..O..:.o-. .. e..Q......, od,a k.. -+-...rl)'t.£....'-<"'-;t.....:..'-¥"J c~,..-."d. r<:..J-: i, ~I ~1~,
- ~ ( J'.:e -t Ie... ~, p.._,C.A;,.....1 coP '+rv... c:.~"""" n.1 uv- cv'''cJ ~~ ~ \.$PJV\<:L-'\.J¡
1":1 ~, O J)...,J .~t'l"""....o ã.........d rI)"'-'-\fi~...ct.e G ç.j!, ~
~-t ,I") -ML ' r,..ple..wAkJJ...9·...... ð-F -fh.o. ~ f1.0l"'-'^<.D~ }....¡C>-4~ ::rr.f;:,'ryo,f.,J,
- S.J~¡ç>......, . .
.. (;,11i .peW (" c. r rO ~O.f't19 -\t> c-ð' ofiN , I D~',}PL"''''''' <"L-T"l rI .i" n.....p.r.gPI.,,_::: _~~.~W~.
1':.-10 lor~. II1,=y II 1821 .
__1 -
'; .
" ~----.- , " -- --., -
®7nlario -!"oneUon ~
,. Application for Employment -
~ Public publlque Compc1ihOf\ NumoCf ... ¡YO' dv C()IICc)u/~
~ 0.....',0 Service .de rOntario Oemande d'emploi
" )0 P...... PRINT... ",p. - O'<IVloq,.phier Ou k"" On LETTRES MOULÉES f.!e, I<ë: ¡?-CfO
. ("l,)S.IID.1 hUe 0' tVfJe- 01 work so...ghE r~'trt! au ~JiJSI~ O-u gem.., rift Jrallil/I TfJe"C'ch~ Mm''SHv - MIII,M.e-,,-' --
1l::iSe...t(Jme.J- Cktt. R.c:.Ve/lV~ ".
T~I omølo.,nonl dO$',<d ,. g"~'o d".m{JJoi d~."t -
(lfluanem . U Tcmpor¡).ry.pan·hrnc TetT1pOfrJf.... full;tiIllC· SUlf'rHOt '!i.luCJ-cn1 Co-oa Sll"Idl:!'nE
1',,·"''''''C.'''f tl""'ItUf,1/fr..· .1IL'IU/U {wI.e' IrtJ.,II/ti1il,. ,t pltW1 t~m'Jj 1:t1t JhJI d~t!IC It'U.u!I,1tul .'tfu'ari(J'~ CUUP;;'tiifll'''
SWillS " curreo(/v emp/(rye'd by The Omario Pub(lc Servic. Ú::ße<:1iI one 1)0. only~ le.....-. ;~.... w ,~.-
::iI"I"1 rJ¡wi ~~ C:"if-S dill tTmnJo'fc.s. dfl I.l/ouctlQ" JmbJÙl1N; d.- rOnlitrlo I Cacho, 1Jt~ J~u~ c~$.1 Onl."o PublIC S.rv,oc .
AU{1:ut."N or P,QIlaÜon2trV G.O. TCI'rlpOfilrV 01 'I,Inç1.i115.,ihed CtOwn N(ln ~µIor' p.' Jð
fOllct (JrJ f)ub ,a~ dl'
Ref'~'¡'I~' [JU 1"11 Jf{jþ"'PJcm t~".,.ur.¡rJ'~ au "(.In clðUt(ir} CCJlutJml~ 1'0nl"'1O
·Personal Data RenseígnementJ; persOnnels --
F,).mily Nam. - NQ11I Gi'-'lItn Niilmlls, - Pr~JtDrrri $nIÜ,:¡... - ImOiJlC Su'namc user; ~1 plev~ou5i... L!fT\f110vea \Jnde' a c,'lerelu ,...an It'
J.-'i ('\d G'P"j S /VQt;1 ~{"Jj~ J}' Jt'(}U~ .IJ.~~.1 iJl'µ JI.ii".JNI6 SQuS. . o/t'1 .Ju/ffl 110m
:.rohl'\~m
M.i"lin(l, Aðdfl~:';1 "- Ad"'eu~ 1)l)!tM. ))r.',¡~. Homo f elephone Nl.rmb..,
Iq~~ ~ e.a.. -IW <;~ IV" d~ f610ph""." J.. m.'.on 739-11't3
Dî'Ì"C:t........."o...¡ O^ -4.,..r 0 8us.iness fClep./'10ne N...mbl:~1
k /N bP'b f¡¡Ø de UHtnhg-nr ~IJ rf.tt;):/ 7.31" ;û.'tù
"*(wisr- -f';l mo~~ b.....c.l -ft, 1:,r cd:~-,,', Ie. ) Olher T~Ie-phcne Number <¡::z..'í ~,;d)0
Ãulffl m~~ro d~ ItJ/~"oone
PfclerrC9 wad, loca11Dfls .... £Jqul..f d, .trh'mI (U~/~e~ll Ola you' hihrC aemre allied war ser",i(.e?
ESI'Cl' Q(J~ ...oc~s ~""l 5ervi d.ns/~s forc~s .lhhllJ~nd.jnl
ï3ro<::.J~."i ~ , .< OT-f(1M.JC'...... ,« (AIIo I" g....r:rte?
aur No"
~L.I..ges YOu søeat I r"ad I w¡-i..e ... l..8nguf.$ PMJ~fllllu.s I kfl'.S Do "Ou hav'C i val'Q dtiye,·, I~cence ~, I CI...
,vt.9L;'h ¡VFronch (,O\tf N<l....i.1 Olho,.. .""cily AV'I'V9L1S 1.111 p~fmrs de- (Qllduiltl v'-Ù:1tl'.' ClasS(.'
Ang/~¡$ F,,~.is (c,.t.)3.\ AutI'tS ¡ør.¡fÓ,SI-r I :vf.s No &.
Ou; NUl'
. - " - ... --- , . +.Are vou Itval4"1' e.ig~bhi to wmk in Caoilda.? -Avlu-vousk droil de rr'lfðil~,'o Can~dd'
: ....ç~. '. No
Oili Non
- - Education Études
~ecQndary Ichooj - hlg.heSl grade DI le\lel ClJmp~eled r loc.;~:rt 1 r.p< 01 cpr'o!'UIC or ø,olQm. rocewed
Ecolf! s~'Of'Jd~ - d.,n;t,.. .nllée ~cl1"Y'I" .",,pc suUfs Ct:rrtl/CiJr au dlulðmf QbJenu
1.<.... ' G~IV·o...l !S..t.... ;,,(.,.1'1
; , POll second.ny - Etllde; µos,ui~ nd~U ~mm.I.II\iE't' CoU~.
Bu'liñeø. u.de Of '1I:hnit.at s.c.iiooL Un'¡v.Is,i~v Olher
ÊCO/~ corrtrnlHciah1. proll1$siontl". ou tKhniqu. CQl1~g" comnrunotul.¡'. Uni~isil~ Aur,.e-
O¡~om... dlliQree or cllnHi-cate Complet. IncOtl\pllIO Speci.lil:.tion Inst.tution Loc.Ilion
Diøl~. grlJd. ou cNfif¡c.t Ache",' /".."".. Sp,.iMisotion ÉJabl¡ß~m;m~ Endrcp¡
~'iL'..e.o~ ,Af9~nJI.. --
Assp-oS~ L",'dn.\u·~ C.. 1\U¡ c..,
... ~~ ã;{.Ctr... . .' V . ßú\"",,', I).L . öA{-.i.o ßo\(:,J.) .~l~ ,DIIoW.....:>
~~. - ;
'h. G...r.. .c. oul C-<AOJ'.,.1 fl,o:;.:..-.....L..q 51. '-Jl..v,)," e" <...\... "Br·OL'(..., Ilf:.:
' f\c..c.c......d ''4 Þt... lé G- ^ ') V
,
}¿ ~ ~~'-'V'Ct.~ ./ c....~,......~,..') ..: AI~e.-C¡ ......; " Q-t-\"-' ú. .
~ t.4rq"al..fl.., ,~e(\..At..\
Oine' ç~, """.S1>O/>'. """"10 - AlJ".s Cou's. "diMs. #--.... . ~
~.u. Lè,..,o\.~ lU"'['-- -ft'~ .. 11\~ ~ (e..uJ.. - -r~ (""'-C.~v...v, fJ.....,J ~ S . ,
.~,,_....-"~.. .-:-. .......-..". Pppra..LoXli... U>~ 101. ~ c. . (.,J..uj o...c..v..c:l..Q.(""N.r.. ('~o..l..' rut"'.;.L" ~ C'e..r 1.' ,....e.J ka,~
¡;¿c- c... &tn 'Co c..-.v\oQ.~ II:'>.. ~ de.o 'CJ ,.ø.~.~, . .
-r.t't\.I.. ~..J I.M/~lt.ofJ. . .'
P.ol...;.n., "".',hc."ons. Ii........ ""'n.....r<hips - Ti"... allw.rKm. ., ..,';1;.11. Dfol..""nnol, ! I..,.,ng O,g¡"UI,on - Ot9.ni$n. ¡:. ,
~WE:,;>"*L4:.. I'ce-,,";''''~ -~a ¡¿........1 ~~.;..,Jlt ßca:~¿I.. ~~
Employment Emplois , . ¡..o(..
~f" .~l1lf)IO"lnl!!'l\l r.,rr.fenCI :~ nt.1y we c.onlac.1 \,Ollr presen e'nfl1n....ltrJ Vves No FOIf"'t, cmDIO~efl,)r No
'" I (V~U'~' ""jJ.~ ruItJrt(;tr!r lIut}(!' rt/HJllo'/J:'uJ' dCJ~ ct} au, NtH. YUltr' .wj;1 .-mt:'I-t",rl1:l tr/UI lu¥C"ar;J~J . 0." Non
()1~1I·1...1 P~r~;rs(~ S1M:-t:lty
O',,,'ru', Jf ".Iirll"~·,'" IJmL-"-~~ ~IL' JrCl.:I:l.I.'T1
P .l'!5.0n~ / L,ut pos.tiQn lillO and tlanihCllion if oIpØhCiilbl. Name and .ca...., ot 81T1:aJ1oyer - Nom i!"f ,ø"uø a. '".mpJo'fff l
7,tl(- rllllJQSr. ~cIUf1l~· pflct!dC'n( III cl,usi/iCf(iqlf $,/ r d ~(i ~g~1\ I i.-" \.') IN "
~ . c e /~ ('r;{' . -,loA C.........~l,M f.2Q.J (.re..,~.. .~~
,,<(:.1": .!."... ~1\9ìt«9.., ~ ~.It'~ l;'...,~,'b-o (\'\.ml.r1t\-., " Hí~-GI A''¡'''' \J I')(C> boI....e...
P." 01 ....ploy"'",,, ~ PP"od~ d'«"plo, I P,..<n' '10" ......y . ~ . .
I . Tr...."...." ..t,,,~ / "" .I~,,- ,,","\<>.oN -. . 0 l'.. "'"
F",'n·d< . To·b ~'t'lJlot ( 1"1:r't-:r.ç
y\~ /-r-:t- c..........- I~ . ;;.. ~O . . .
Renon fOI IClV"lng - Rllison d, "o'r, d~/'''fJ IiØ (r...... t\'\ 1oA,,}.t(,~',(' Nan"" o! lupervltQr T<I<llhOne - 7'11_
'1: Orft'\ ~..t1ll ~ \c...~e(1. ~ ~-I"iA. - . c::.~ '. NU/U flft ~o'r.f! JIIIJ~r""n·llf I
.1:- ..,;~,^"d 1,t.c..:JII ,-,;,~t þ,,-ç\C. ,,,'" fi~"~<fllif1 r:..k.r<.;\¡,\'l 11'\ Pc.II, «ö:\dk. "13"1· ..2.:t ~ '1
DUll","' ,I RQ-~I)ol1l.ib'I~Ml''' n (),.~Jlon! I 'ÐSIJO"J~rpM~S ~rC.c "'oJI~lÞt...." c."~ r~.J·: i'''''';1 ~J~'
... ,r(l "....:..,.¡.;.... CU.I..· ~NJ~.. 0( e..(L..., d.<> k.. ...... M.....'.:..-.t,.:.""J
- ~(i~ "\11.... 4> p,,_,...k....) coP 'ff....... c:.~.....-.;1 d L.4\c. è\.ff.d ~ ~ \ ,SLi~,l;.'^-Í
I~ ~, O J)w ,.1.., ~,....o 0.......,0 rQ<-....J..\.Þ.."'t.º ç..I; '-.f.-
ct.Q:2...... -í ,f'} +N- . ........ple,VOf~- ðP "iN. ~ ,íh"tx.'""'-<:..D, N°-4~ :rn~ r,,,,,J..
- S>-J': ¡p......... . .'
.. (;,1' .F£MP r",rr"'~Il> 4t. ¡:-"ÿ"i.u ,ICJ~' hIS/'.. ~-r;.d r r~pkYV1"'~C::·:::~<¡"~~:-. '.
1~..ul lor.. II.,:... 1'/821 I
". ............0"'--.
- .
. , -..
Ptl·V~~'f'f. pO'!iJ11000 ~l ltt . £r"'1,Jr~ IJI;Jc6dc'~' Nill'''' ,....Id ,llt(lu-s.::i I)' .'II\: Þ1'1\I" '\'ff'" ", .n;·.·...".. cI(~ ("",,';.1,,""['1,1 ;:-"- 't"" .
_ ~ . ,::¡ . ç, ~~:;, fY\o\.......()I", ... (.A ..,TeI, \.
() 1\. d.r. ~ ~ ~. -
1\.e....1... ~['1)(.l1.. 11 rP ... 0 f"'!<r.¡..DO. &-N'o.....(..) ~ - ,
P'.'1jUll ul EIllv1aVlñLÞn1 A~fl }(iC d'"mj.'IOi. j Fjll~l-l S."~:'1y T.."t"tH''t11 Fmill '
r.",,, '1". ¡TU ,1 /þCCO
O.u:- (s.:S Hr.v ß'o . I
U",I"Ho hll k,.·a....uq R.d ~~ItJ {/I~ ...u,,~· rleµ,lll I'i.U1I1j~ ut "'~II) "\'I:-.nr T"I"phllnp r"/r.,.ttw...
Appr<;l.l.4oJ.. t:uik'-'~ C1f)S.~ Næ;;::"":;:~.Jo H I ~YL- ~/~S- _~
UIII<I·... II", HH 1"lh~htlt'!'5 Fl "I(.-'I/J/I_~ r '1·.'in~"I$"b,ltil~:i-
ApPf'~ V"",,+ .....'-., i-<-( pc-a ð /- ~",,-Q e..,,{....&. ! I"> <::..u...d.4 r-<:?..<J~·J.:.",ß.
~ c.o "'" fl\..C¡j'l.,è,J "t ¡ "d..~ i" ,'....0
, c. ~> IQ)..<:...J ," ~.Ul. Q,....~c.r...,,·..L.~ -h c :-"-.pcvu. <i ,1'.('.. ,,<: ^-f +7 p.-; D { P r ¥ oJ ~ t.,
'+e c.l.t...+c.( ¡YV......." ~.... Ma,."k,j iJ........~
_ p/~-poAIL.<>Å- c..b--uf?rv'tJl..w, ",e. n:..p 01"1.:1 .(ð ( o..y;>p,-c.iAn1 !!'} p~.L.' .ç,r...a.+~¿'''''''' .
p,> ...IIU.... JIII"'ILltMl !IU.... EJnfrll1i /1I'tiC:rcll'lI{ ~ N.II1N\ i.~III~ ;,~Irlr....'i 1..1 I'IUUI(IYI-t rv-;;;;;.-;;-:;;J-;~-,,:;,,'·d-::;:-::::;:;;:.,-::;: --.,...... -.....
A . I. \ Lc Po{ , '\ ,.::.1 f ~ D ~ Qu.sCA"'l v-<.- .
':>S e.&:l rrv.........- c..... V f-ì.:.'5. '_., S rf'J.JIJ O~ ~
'~"~llIt oj c~n;Jloyulcn ' PL't,orlf' d'!~I1II'¡W IFlI\oÎlI5;d;1;,,, - rrdlr~~tnMr ÇUMI ')...y~,...... Po...c"' C.-i".d ol..a M-t
r,,,,,, .1., ¡TU'" or- L &-oc:~.../l(. C'·J,.
N~" '(~. AJøoJ S's: ~ ~ nr·
u".,:wt~u·lnt IE~'¡lYI'"9 Rrt,,,(jH ¡If' "I(II,p It'"IJ·lIt . ··..{òr .a.. i\I'¡II'h' ul 'SUlJl~t1.-.:¡O' - TI'lo.:;¡l!~~I:II· T~/I';;;:;;;;:·-----
~rl'u.dC~t;.p;l\l~f- :~~r;;:i~ Ip~. ~;''¡':;;:~'''':''R:;'~, J 3'U. - 8:1·4;(.
DLllr(": 'C'5-pons.hihlld''5-'" FO'~'/10tJ.S l rCUJOIISÒ Orlltð. --
.. "-....... I t;....¡Áo.fL4 { S~ '~'~'lY\l......L.
_ '-e....;'-".....~\Í;..d ct.........( c-p "......~ --{-M OA. 'IS oS Y s .;,~ r n .
- ^"'S, ~ ~¿J ,^ ......f. t:"4 pl'E>'Jrt:'-r.oo -t::cr '-of<--:. ~ '1~Ier>;
- "....~dlp.q' tll.'tv......--'Goo' -Þ-C"Y\. -4-t1Jl .o....bl.·"" .., r~
. · ~ . 1- ' , a... s'" /l"U'" ,.LA
- a..cOu..Mt..4 ;OOpl,},..s. b, J..I~ "f fI..s.e.4-0fY'I........ C(P.....t<... ~í I' (~C.tll O~
. ò+.' ~ '-'-' I\........~ (..~c:~ eA:Ú'.....Ccl..é4 -A:> O/¡jL \J<;:'p-;', 9............'-('-"'" c.~ 'oJ"
. . r. .,o~r~. <;..íN~ (lÞ h.<:.If'~ 0.......,..1 (Jr<t;.Ndl1.l\~'" . _
t.l thlS SC'(:lilUfl .alalill' your $1r.iU;. and .....or.. ck¡pct'I\enCe. Including -In, \~n~'" WOI'k. 10 lhe Q\,¡.ahf;cattOH$ OflhL! lþQ\iI~I )lI ~vt lNt'Wcn vOu ,j Ife ac:»ply~ l.8l1aCf) ë:tcieJ.1"-JI"dt
'!thef :l!L as reQuIred).
O"I'IIS Cl'tl. .$""'/.()II, dk"~~ !folrf!' ~~f ~nc. ., VGS .prÙud.s ')TOf.j'$JO",.... V CDtntJlÚ I~ ·¡wðíl "dillvOÚl. /).If rltnporr oJU'-- Qu.nres "Q~/US JllJUf' I~ j)o¡r,,' (Jue vQuj,
I O.ÇUHr~1 IlUmdf~ d'¡j4llreS fttu~s ...... Msu.ri,l.
r l\,,-m ~ ~~..o:..á 'Ý) C;L. H.........~ /¢a~~ d.Lf"~'
It'\.""-.......... .~~. QA"'r-p~ d) c.. S"..."o~,:.~ ;O~, =-,<=/ W.....t-~ ~
'-1hAt .I ~ cI...4...Q el'.p.....c:i~ W,.t¡" ~f-ú æ-n.eJ h.~-(. o..c..h1tJQ..d?JcQ{!J
f:) í~Q.t\ ~~(l..-{' ~ q I,¿, I \. I l¡,..." ~ P re....J, ~ po.:.. I ".. ~ ¿,........... h CJ..Ar-( {/....;. L~
~. - Q!.e c..J-..4 - ~ I-.ß-
a..c Cé........A.I,.......~ ~~ QPPJlCt.vQctJI uJ ,vtì 'tA.t4.è'::; .... . T( ..>...... ~ ....... I
['~ ...¡..., c. ..lk~..JL":-. fœ;I¡."pu--lòrm c:~ r ,"¡f\(f·d.. .r.Q.k~A.trd..~~ a.-?U;1/ ~....... ~. I~J
\.JJ ¡Ì.r¡ -Hu. e.lX1l.l,.o.Ø....i--~ 0+ .~ fl'~F.ri!j
~ f0S, "-I~érrt [>oÇ ~"-4~ ('{'4A'\/ Cle..r ¡t. .., 'U\.Q.I.:W:...A î1'\.t.. .J.. f1 o..:..r. ~~ (.' "'......r..!.l(
.. ··_·_..m .-". ..~.,. i'r. 'i-f\t¡, ßr<:.c:b.J IU~ I 1l$S. e~· P:l{!.f,..( ~,~ n ö......... .j0..Ao'l ··+e.r ht. ,J)..h .'.....} ~t+JJ)
.1t.rrÎ.t J:. ().tA-,c~..Ly ('~(l.....-ûJ -IN.. re4þð"'s., b,11 +:<;', 0.(" ...11 1ls.s-c:.~"Sff"€.;.'lf CJef~
m~....h.II~ a.-:j s~.i.¡.i-t¡ ~ Assf? ~ÇI.' 'fl ~a.OL(..~ fJ"'cf>C!jft~"J c;...nd ,-"". ¡~
t;'ò-T-rpu-fu . (1t'&1....n.~ -It,,.. ~ ~6.~ ~sk/f"'r' '_ _H
firrm1 of .:):Q' iilnQ proof Or QltgdJi ,¡tv 10 wQ,l¡¡ In Canada wllIl~e r-eQ;~ntr.d before 1t "ltlCl1IiUf1Qnl
O" I.'~IYN." Ifµ C;JtmJK1¡1f. .........J~4 J"cmrNf}t'nJf!Hl, Ult(." I',erJtI(: rlv I"n .i9~ fit ur" prøuvlt a. So" .t1rpu!t'it~'¡ilP.'I: Jfttlf'.IJÑt( .".. C;,.I.,'U1.l
... liD'''' nr:'(".lu,,"~ :Y'NHfT (It thu ',"U:I(1r5 ~(1 Hit:! 'UCC:l."""'~I~~ '!'Î1~CfIO.I. ðr~ O(J '-eQulfcrnt.lflt' rll' ~~. v,¡II.{1 .1"1,0"1 .. 114 " ~I' ,. ...'I,t.··.·.¡,,:1.oI ~~Il"':..t.I·... f~ll~I~I.~JI1t.n.:~ .¡~.Il.lra.,I':;;:-·- .---.
-c1i'<wahhcalll.:m ul -S, mc 1JI (.h.tn9.~ II' ":lit"lIl'S nl¡W ,C''Sult .tl e-'''''~''UI\ln.'H -Or lcu"l..nrlIO() ~ u. "'_'p4I,"m'!f"
.. "'11'11: t""ut f/oltlli qu~ C,>Omn$ Q~5 'r":rl'lY,~~jt'('~t'J Ct·r1l.'S.$uj f(lt~t dfU O.Jf}ltI1~~' d'.JtlpJOI IJ}." t~" IIl',u~rf, II" (,·tli.r1u't~· le,Mr.'l'. 1:~.'rJ'(~-.t'-~ 1'{j¡.l..!...."J,.>,,,,J\.
,"'rU( _~.'rrn,. tIp ".ifVr.~'I. ..u...' ,I,SI (J..,hlrCilll[¡II "u It II ~Jriu~'J'~lnl't1r fie 1.liI(ul ,.~,( ~"Jrl~;'~.·J" u" 11.'11"":" ..,i 1"1,; r."J.5.....t;,.,.j ir.'''r, / ,,'
I
I h.~tchv decl.no Ihilt UllJ forouo,nu I:(I'Dt~',.,auOn" ..ug: ðIld Corl1p'C~1! 10 mV tnowietJgI, . HoIv.-Þ "~II '-Ul;I(I~t.'(1 ¡Ill ....W~"IWa..oõ oo:hCl"' u~nf1"!~.' - ./ ~-..----
I '~U(t(~,,1"'ld ThoIt a loll5O 1~llIPnl-'f\. ""lay dJlQuaf.ly me ItOI'l'\ cmpJo't'n'lCnt, Of CauM my 4i1l1.....ut. A"'e'" ,·uu.., .-rt''''.' u· Ime 1*--·~.'II:t.. ?UJ/J/)/ v:
.'f~ .'Wlðsrr,ln(i-I~' o1f1~:!itto (IN .fa p'¡',~'e .f¡ut Ie.! If'rt,S(lrqn.ert'loC'rU¡ I;i·~...uu, s-.ont, ..ui.m OVlf 1m '.-wlll·l~'/IOI lI,r.~ (; . .
/1'/" ~.ICh(.·" l,;om,ÞleH CI """'$, ~lql 1U~I. ~ -........
,It> I,tIIf1,HrmtJSl u'UlffI f~U5S~ déClil'~/mn /i.clll .,n"IJ;''''' Iff ,.¡e, dtJ I7lI'dl!RYntk OU mol~ .
''''''''."'1.':.'''' '" naf~"'~__!k>(./ ;:C:¡ /9 ª"'--
'nfo.rft..,um Id'qu.._t.ctd In ;l'ro. "~'~c.tion J. Itlfwfltd -conf'.£d'entf.lUl' £41S nlnnignwntH1,. donn6.s 51" ell' fø",nU/IIÙe iont con,;d~., COl.lltJ·~ COnÜu.llll.'s I
r:.1l nU.ce....se .~ R~$I!'...6J ruug" du þUIC.hl -- .-