HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-0890.Campsall.92-01-09 GRIEVANCE CpMMISSiON DE
SETI'LEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS '
890/91
FOR Tire J. Nonger
GRIEVOR Counsel
Gowltng, Strathy E Henderson
Barristers & Solicitors
FO~ T~E j. ~wts
EHP~YER Counsel
Winkler, Filion & Wakely
~rrtsters & Solicitors
HE~ING Nove~er 13~ 27~ 1991
D~ISION
This is a cl~ssification grievance. The Onfon, on
behalf of the griever, alleges that the griever is improperly
classified as an Electronics Technician. The remedy sought
is that the position be reclassified to that of a Maintenance
Electrician, Foreman/Woman or, in the alternative, that the
Ministry be ordered to reassess and reclassify the position
by way of a Berry order.
The griever's duties are nany and complex.
Bowever, to the 'credit of the parties and their counsel, they
were able to come to an agreement as to the facts of this
case and narrow down the areas in dispute. Rence, the
factual analysis of the case is not difficult.
A basic understanding of the griever's position can
be found in the Position Specification ~hich is appended'
hereto as Appendix 'A'. The parties agree that to a large
extent that Position Specification is accurate. However,
~hey also agree that the Specification ~ould be more accurate
if it contained thc following clarifications. ~ith respect
to all the duties relating to the installing 'and maintaining
functions, the parties agree that the griever has
'substantial independence in deciding .'when and if' the task
will be done.' Further, the patti, es agree that 'for the
· ajority et the ti~e, the griever perforeed such 'other
related duties' on his own initiative..' Finally, on
agreement, the parties would have clarified the Position
Specification ~y including the following text=
The Griever has a substantial input into the
planning and allocation of the annual hourly
workplan o~ the electric crew.
The Griever significantly participates in the
formulation of the annual monetary budget for the
electrical cre~ vhich is vitbin Facilities
Maintenance Budget. '
The Griever is required to estimate the quantity
and quality of materials required, and the time
required for the tasks, and requisitions materials.
To date, all such requisitions have been approved.
The value of some requisitions can be in.the
thousands of dollars.
Contract i nit:
a) Capital Contracts are significant projects with
funding from outside the district. With respect to
Capital Contracts, the Griever is required to
inspect and report on the work done by outside
contractors, and assist and co-operate with other
foremen, tradesmen and non-trade staff. The
Griever is re~/uired to attend and participate in
project meetings, both before and during the
project, often vith staff from head office, and is
required to liaise with other agencies, local
utilities, and Ontario Hydro.
He is also required to review tender documents,
sometimes of a complex nature, in order to ensure
compliance of the work product at various stages
with ~linistr¥ standards. This is a~ i~ortant and
ongoing part of the Griever's position, and is
dependen~ upon capital funding bein9 approved,
b) With respect to some non-capital projects,
such as-the hiring of a line truck and/or back hoe
used in conjunction vith the Griever and the
electrical crev to perform a job, the Griever is
required to solicit bids, undertake bid summaries,
and select and hire the contractor, and is
responsible for the supervision of the con~rac~or.
Such .contracts of these types are signed without
prior approval fro~ ~he Services Supervisor~ and
~re ~ilized, typi¢~ll¥~ 10 to 15 times per year.
Supervision:
The ~rievor spends about 25% of his time
supervising iourneymen..
The Griever also has a full time apprentice that he
supervises, and has supervisory duties over
non-journeymen on an irregular basis.
(The parties agree t~at the apprentice ~s not a
journeyman ),
The Griever's supervisor is not an electrician, and
does not have the skills to review in ~ technical
sense the work done by the electrical crew, There
is not another ~inistry electrician in the
district. It is no~ unusual vithin
for a Service Supe~viso~ to ~ack electrical
expertise.
The part,es d~sag~ee as to ~hethe~ the ~e~el of
autonomy held by ~he Griovor~ and described a~ve,
can be charac[e=ized as 'General Superv~s[on'~
be[ieve this =a[~er. is [or the de[er=ine~ion o~ the
Board.
Also of relevance to this case are the applicable
Class Standards. The standard for the Electronics Technician
is appended hereto as Appendix '$'. The position the griever
seeks is that of a ~aintenance Electrician, Foreman/Woman and
" that Class Standard is appended as APpendix 'C'. The parties
agree that all the sentences found within the ~laintenance
Electrician, Foreman/Woman Class Standard apply to the
grievor'~ position with the exception of the sentence which
reads: 'Positions allocated to this class involve supervision
of at least two tradesmen employed at the journeyman level.'
~{owever, the'parties do agree that the griever does supervise
journeymen approximately 25% of the time. At times, this
involves two or more journeymen and at other times it does
not, But the parties were .unable to determine how much of
that supervision'invOlves two.or moro journeymen. On the
other hand, tho parties did agree that the griever does not
"order materials" as is set out in the ~laintenance
Electrician Foreman/~oman Class Standard. instead the
griever "requisitions materials" regularly. ~.
The Union takes the position that the facts reveal
that the work done under the griever's authority is not
"subject to review for satisfactory quality and compliance
with directions, regulations, plans and specifications" as is
expected of a Foreman/~oman. Instead, the Union takes the
position that the ge. lever has aero autoflo~¥ than that.
Finally, o[ relevance is the preamble to the
Haintenance'Trades Classes 3ob Standard .which is appended
here as Append/x 'D'.
The Argument
The position of' the Union is that the griever does
everything that is contained in the Electronics Technician
Standard but 'that he does more than that and has sufficient
difference in the degree of expectation and supervision of
the position that he is improperly classified as such. The
Union points to the agreement of facts which includes a
number of duties.beyond the job specification and which are
not referred to in the Electronics Technician Standard which
the Employer has acknowledged in the statement of facts to
compromise 'substantial' or 'significant' or 'important' job
functions. Specific enphasis was put on the contracting of
both capital and non-capital projects indicating financial
and expert responsibilities. The Union also stressed that
%he degree of supervision imposed upon the griever was
extremely limited given that the griever is the only skilled
electrician in'the district and receives notechnical
supervision from anyone. Further, he is given substantial
independence and autonomy and thus cannot be said to be
receiving the level of 'general supervision' imposed upon an
electronics technician, Further, the Union stressed the fact
that the parties agree that the griever does supervise
journeymen 25% of the time and this was said to be very
significant. All these factors combined together were said
by tho Union to amount to a subsantial difference between the
Class Standard el an Electronics Technician and the actual
duties performed by the griever. The Union said that the
duties 'best fit' the Maintenance Electrician, Foreman/Woman
Class Standard or, in the alternative, that a Berry order
vould be appropriate. The Onion suggested that 90 days vould
be sufficient [or the-Nin/stry to reassess and reclassify tho
position. In support of this argument the Onion relied on
the [ollowing cases: ~udder and ~inistry of ~e~lth, GSB File
402/88 (Corsky) dated October 31, 1990. Edmonds and ~cGee an~
H~n~s~ry o~ ~ranspoc~at~on an~ Co.un,cations, GSB E~le
1034/86 (Samuels) ~ce~ber 9, 1988, ~each and Hin~stry o~ the
and ~in~s~ry o~ ~he ~nuironeen~, GSB ~ile 530/88
~a~ch 5, 199~ and ~vsec and H~n~stry o~ Rous~nO,
1589/89 (~o~) Oc~obe~ 9, 1990.
Counsel for the ~.~ployer conceded that the facts
reveal overlap in the duties of the griever with his current
classification and that of a Fore=an/t~oman. Rowever, it was
submitted that the Technican Standard is a ~bes~ ~i~~'
overall. Counsel for ~he E~ployer stressed ~he ~act that the
f~ain~enance Trades Classes' Preamble contemplates ~hat
supervision =ust ~ount to 60t o~ ~he )ob function. Re
recognized ~ha~ ~h~s may have been ~~ed by the
Maintenance Electrician Fore~an~oman Class Standard
indicating tha~ at least 60~ of the ti~e ~ust be devote~ 'to
electrical work or the supervision of eleckrlcians.' Read
together, it was suggested that ~his means that, at the very
leask, the Maintenance, Rlectrician Fo~zman~oman would be
expected to supervise at leas~ 40q of the time and that the
facts of this case, taken at their best, indicate that the
9rievor supervises only 2~ of his ti~e. Reliance was placed
on ~he case of Larman~ and Ministry of Trans~or~a~ion~ GSB
File 88~/86 (Fisher) March 14, 198~. Counsel for the
Employer also addressed the issue o[ supervision. It was
acknowledDed that ~he 9rievor has considerable independence.
However, this was said to be consistent with the Class
Standard o[ an Electronics Technician and ~he concept of
~enoral su~rvision. Counsel relied on the [ollowin9 GSB
,, cases' vhich have dealt vith the concept of 9. eneral
" supervision: Lott/Oessup and Ninistry of Transportation~
File 852/89 (Kaplan) October 1, 1990 end Cockinq and Hinistr~
of Transportation, G$~ File 1244/90 (F~sher), ~tober 24,
199~. Fur~her~ ~t vas said ~hat ~he grievor"s vo~k ia still
sub~ect to reviov for technical correctness and again fa]Is
~L~h~n 9enetal supetvLsion. ~i~h regard ~o ~he additional
du~es ~ha~ ~ero no,.contained ~n ~he original ~ob
spec~ca~ion and vhich a~e not spec~ica~l~ sec ou~
E~ectron~c$ Techn~c]an Standa~d~ counse~ for the Employer
argued ~ha~ ~hes~ genera~ duties a~e not of sufficient
;val~ or ~a~vre ~ c~ange ~e ~ssence et ~e cot~ duties
~be p0s~ion. Re~ianc~ ~a$ p~aced on ~he cases o~ D~mond and
H~n~s~ry o~ TransporCa~o~, GSB ~i2e '1822/90
3uly 22, 199~, Rird and M~nls~ry o~ Consumer and Commercial
Relations, GSB ~ile 1349/87 (Slone) September 8~ 1989 an~ Roy
an~ ~in~s:ty o~ ~atrual Resources~ GSB Erie 946/89
~arch ~9~ ~990. It ~as argue~ that all these duties, even
:hough they are very i~porCan: and highly valued, fsi2 v~th~n
the duties o~ 'checking*~ .'tnstruc~tng' and carrying out the
general duties o~ an Electronics Technician. Rence~
sa~d that :he griever ~as proper~y classt~te~ and ~e were
urged to dismiss the grievance. Ro~ever~ tn 'the event chat a
Berry order ~as con:emplated~ counsel for the Employer asked
that the glnlstry ~ given 120 days to re-evaluate the
pos t: i on. .
The Decision
The Grievance Sett]ement Board has articulated many
times and in many different ways the standard that applies
when assessing )ob classi~ica~:ion cases. Out ~_unction ~s not
to act as a department ot~ human resources~ nor is it to
i~pose our own personal views on the part/es. But it ts
accepted in the.jurisprudence and accepted by the parties in
this case that the onus· is on the Union to sho~ chat he is
actually performing a Job and tho essence or core duties do
not (it within the class standard to which he has been
assigned by 'the Employer. See Aird and 'Hinistry o[ Consumer
and Commercial Relations, su_~.~. Thus, we l~k to the ~reed
~acts and to the C~ass S~andard of ~lectronics 'Technician to
determine whether or no~ ~he griever is, in essence or ~n his
core duties, ~o[ng a job tha~ ~its vith~n the Class Standard
'
o[ an ~lectronics Technician. a large extent, it must be
said that the Qrievor's duties do [all ~ithin'the Electronic
Technician's Class S~andard. Re-ever, there ace so many
duties o[ such a stQni[icant nature that fall completely
outside of.anythin~ alluded to i~ the ~lecttonics Technician
Class Standard that it cannot be said that the griever's job,
in its essence or core, fits within that position. The fact
that the.griever has '.~ionific.ant' input into the formulation
of the annual budget and is required to estimate quantity and
quality of materials required add the time required for tasks
is a very important function. He has the authority to
requisition materials. While this may often be the function
of an Electronics Technician~ there is nothing in that job
standard which would imply such responsibility. Bowever, %f
even more significance Is the griever's responsibilities with
regard to contracting. I~ is agreed by the parties that he
inspects and reports on work done by outside contractors, he
participates in pro~ect meetings with head office staff and
is in co=unication with other agencies, utilities and
Ontario Bydro. Ho reviews complex tender documents and is
relied upon to ensure compliance with Ministry standards.
With non-capital projects he hires, solicits bids and selects
contractors and 'is responsible for the supervision of tho
contractors. In contrast, the EleCtronics Technician's' ~ob
standard indicates characteristic duties more in line with
tho actual electronics work rather than the ad=inistrative
and supervisory responsibilities undertaken by this griever.
The parties spent a great deal of their time making
submissions regarding ~hether this positron was subject to
general supervision and made suggestions to this Board as to
what general supervision ought to be considered to be.
Frankly, while the parties ought to be applauded for their
ability to reach an agreed statement of facts in this matter
and their ability to pare down the issues, we are not left
with sufficient evidence to make a useful determination on
the question of general supervision and the extent o~
supervision in this case. Nor would ~t be an appropriate
case for this Board to offer any 'learned' elucidatlon to
future ~arties as to the concept of general' supervision.
Suffice it to say that the facts reveal that the griever does
have a very high degree of automomy ~n this job, especially
with regard to the contracting functions that do not seem to
be recognized ~n the Electronics Technician's Class Standard.
For the all the above reasons, it is clear to this
Board that the griever is not properly classifLed. The next
Question that must be addressed is whether it would be
appropriate that the griever be classified as a Naihtenance
Electrician Foreman/~oman. In order to succeed in this
branch of tBe.aroumenL, the Union ~ould have to convince the
8oard that ~he essence or the core o[ ~he griever's duties
best fits vithtn that of the Foreman~oman classification.
Ho~ever, ~t cannot be sa~d that the evidence ~n this case is
sufficient to do that. The Class S~anda~d o~'the
;oreman/;;oman ~ndLcates at ~ts outset ~hat 'positions
allocated ~o t~ts class involve the supvetvtston o~ at least
t~o tradesmen employed at the journeyman ~evel in the skill
o~ insta]~ation or ~a~ntenance york re~ated to the geneta~
upkeep of electrical .wiring ,,, etc," Reading that class
standard together with the preamble for the ~lalntenance
?fades Classes Job Standard makes it abundantly clear to the
Board that the essence or the core o[ the Foreman/Woman
position involves the supervision of tradesmen. The facts of
this case do not reveal that the essence or the core of the
griovor's duties involves supervision of tradesmen. Instead,
the agreed [acts reveal that the grievor's position in its
core or .essence is to carry out a variety of electrical work
at the journeyman level in the layout, installation, repair
and maintenance of general electrical equipment. (Soo the
Position Specification,) The griever does undertake
supervisory functions both with respect to contractors and
with respect to other tradesmen. But they are not of
sufficient extent or nature that it can be said to amount to
the essence of his job. Hence, we do not accept the Union's
submission that the griever ought to be classified up to the
Foreman/Woman level.
In the result, we are convinced that the griever's
position is improperly classified and we so declare. We
order that, arising from our jurisdiction as recognized in
the ~ decision, the Ninistry be required to reclassify
the griever's position, to a suitable classification or, in
the event that a suitable classification does not exist, the
Employer is ordered to create a new classification within
days of this order. Such new classification is to be doomed
to be in effect' 20 days prior to tho filing of this grievance
and the griever is tO be compensated accordingly. The Board
remains seized in the event that the parties are unable to
reach agreement with respect to any matter arising out of
this decision including the issue of compensation°
DA?SD at Toronto, Ontario this 9r~ day of 2992,
Paula Knopf - Vi~Chairperson
~. Rannach~, ~ember
Possess~ of a ~notr~ou t~ ~l~ntenint. ~t~t~c~in LL~t~te u~der the Apprenticcsh~
~ e~orseoeo~ ~d appropriate ~ OperoLor'. Permit v~th In .ccePtobAe dr~vLnl retard.
Work It carried ou~ at the ~ourneynafl level a~ involves ~he
re~lr t~ ~a/fltenance or complex compuLer bssod traffic control day,caf,
P~ov/dis direction to other electrical ita(~ loch 8i Electrical Apprenc~
and ~2ectr~cLans.
~errorus other related cXeanin9 and na~nteflance york on electronic
electrical
~evisect..rebr-~ar~-. I96~.
:ride: soM cr~G ~ -~ecc~n~c ~or~ ~ practice ~t 4
~eco~:~ ~ o~ YOCiC~Ofl~ ~ChOO~ Or ~ eq~T&~GC
c~b~Ac~on of ~ucac~on ~d L~er~ence,
2. Ac 2eut one ?e~ of ~e~eflce is ~ ~ecc~tc~ e~(4(~ ~
pr&c:~ces of ~e e~ect~c~ :~zde; ~ vo~jflj ~'L~e of cee
~T-l~vs ~ ~ac~ons re~c~ co elfcc~J:a~ ~,c~Lat~ofll; ..
ir. st~c~on~ ib~l~; to~ ~ystc~ condJc2o~.
~n~tallatJ,m ~t ~int~ce ~rk reZat~ to ~e 4enen~
el,-~'rrtc~J k-irinc~ ~qu~t; ~L~res,etc.; at a Gove~ent
,~ ~s r,,auir~ t~ su~se the ve~ tO c~pZetLQn acco~n( to accepted
~.th,,dS rind re~s~&t~ons ~n the electr~ca~ ~de. fie ~ete~tnes
,,!,ere n,,~,'~. ~e ~ ~s sub,oct ta re~ f~r
[:,.ctr~tan. ~' ~7 a~so perfa~ ocher tasks of a re~ate~ rJture
~:~r at 2eajt ~ o~ the~r t~e ~st be devoted to eXectrxca2
t~e surer¥is~on a~ el~trici&ns. X~ ad~iti~ t: ~ou~
~fl~er 4xrecc~flr the employee ~fl ~s~t~ofls ~ th~s
:re ~4tc:~' i~ ~:~' o~ ~cer~a~ requgre~ the
:~e tas~ an~ requisitions or a~ers ~ter~a~. Ne ~7
re~:re~ t~ ~nspecc &~ re~ ~fl cae vo~ ~one ~ ~cs~de e]eccr~ca:
.. Pre~erib~y technica~ schoo~ education; c~mp2et~an ~f the requ~re~
6~;rent~cesh~p ~ cae e~eccr~ca~ trade and certx/~cac~ ~' the
~eFar~ent of'~ur: '~oe a~ acceptable equ:¥a~eet c~ex~a::~fl ::'
c4v:~nt~ ~ethcds &~ practices of the e]ectr;c42
~ar~nI ~novledle of the ~av3) ~-lavs and regulat~,,n~
~]~ctrical
At ~c~t f~ve years~ acceptable e.~r~ence as an
~ork a~I~c~cnC~ frw ~]ans Ind S~cxf~CGt~ons: {o~
c~t~,
%%ct: th,- ~'qu;vaJc~t a;pL~CS~ thc ~;pls~&nt v~]~ ~,~ r~,lulrc.I
$3O00-9)O;4
helots does hoc v~c &~cLon ~ ~ r~n class.
~~~ o~ · ~sicLon ~ ~sAc~ clusLf~ ~ 4
Z~ s~ ~sL~, s~ o~ ~ au~es ~ve a
~es. S~veve:, ~e ~pp/L~ac~a ~ ~ch ~lls Ls
Elec~on/cs Tec~zci~, ~2ec~on~ b?~, ~y
~c~ce ~es ClAsses.
,-' ~'~oa.r y_., 1967
~~ vo~ ~ ~e f~eJd La not p~c~, ~st of ~ pos~on~
~4C~ CO ~e3e c~3jeJ ~v~ye ~cefl~ce
· ~ve~nt ~c~s ~d~s or
~e ~cenuce ~e~c ser~es~ h~eyer~ c~s~s~s of f~r levels:
~elper~ ~p~ver, Jcume~ ~d ~cen~ce Fo~. G~s serles
is ~:e~d~ :o cover ~e fo~g
qu~ica~l~s, ~o, ~ oa ~e ~b Crag ud ~rience,
~d; evenly, :o & j~e~ leve~ ~o~c~; ~vided a
of & ~c~ cr~e buc ~e~ su~ ~kf~]s ~ ~~ for
of 4 ~ic~ ~ c~ac ~ec~fic trade.
vi~ i specific c~de, e.g. ~p~ of ~i~ ~ f~ ~J: repot
operuc~oa of a va~er ~d ~e ~o5~ ~m.
~ou~e~eq ~.~ev~ C
~ac 3u~l~ o[ ~ or
Lease ~ o~ ~ ~. ~o~ ~sic~oaJ ~ ~c~ ~ ~ne ~c~ent.
b~cre ~-~ or mo~ ~c~b~cs shoe CAe ~spoflzib~cies of I ~sici~
~ich ~d ~ cluSif/~ ac the ~or~ leve~
~c~beflc ~y, ~e posiCi~ v~ be class~ied at ~e j~m~ Level.
~ 41~ posiCi~$ ~ the ~Cen~ce mech~ic ~r trade~ classes, ~e
~c~ent3 ~3c devote 4t lea~t
~k~ed tradea
' ~hud. ry 1967
(N~V 1 9 199Q