The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1981-0457.Law.81-12-28IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATiON !Jnder The CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINIXG ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOAR3 Between: OPSEU (Mr. Albert H. Lau) and The Crown in Right of Ontario Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations Grievor, Before: Professor J. W. Samuels - Vice-Chairman Ms. Susan D. Kaufman - Member Mr. Ken id. Preston - #ember St- the Griever: xr N. Lucziv, Grievance-Classification Cfficer Ontario Public Servic2 Emplo:lees Union Fcr t5e Em3ioyer: Leon Zorff, Manager, ?2rsonnel Services. Ministr;! of Consumer and Commercial Relaticns Hearina: -- Cecmher 15, l%l . ._ ;” :.. :.,. 1. Introduction At the time~of the grievance, the grievor was a Data Control Officer in the Personal Property Securities Registration Branch of the Ministry of Consumer and Com- mercial Relations, and was classified as a Data Processing Technician 4. He applied for the position of Data Base Services Coordinator in the same Sranch, which is classified as Executive Officer 1. The vacancy was filled by a less senior employee, Mrs. M. Stephens, and the grievor claims that he was unfairly treated and that the employer breached Article 4.3 of the collective agreement. This article pro- vides : In filling a vacancy, the Zmployer shall qive primary consideration to qualifications and ability to oerform the required duties. Where qualifi- cations and ability are relatively equal, length of continuous service shall be a ccnsideration. T,he griever argues that he is at least relatively equal in qualifications and ability for the position, and therefore his seniority should have given him the position ovei the ~ersoz selected. 3.e testimony at our hearinq 3 indicated that xe ~csition became vacar.t in Xovember 1980, and the 3mnplcyer -t”,arnp& to fill the spot in December 1990. X0 i.?--*ry.=l . . 2. applied for the job. After a leng hy interview prccedure, consisting of both a written and oi.al part, the panel dealing with the matter concluded that no cindidate was really fully qualified, but that Mrs. Stephens WL:S the best of the appli- cants. In view of the earlier failure to find someone for the position, it was decided to put the successful candidate in the job on an "underfill" basis, until she met the full qualifications and abilities needed. . The Data Base Services Coordinator 'We heard about the position of Data Base Services Coordinator from Hr. F. Xeighlal, the man who left the position in November 1980: ?lr. T. ,Neagher,the then Project Xanager of Jersonal Property Security Registration Support, a group with whom the Cata Base Services Coordinator would deal frequently: Mr. A. Loginow, the Deputy Director of the ?ersonal ?rcpe,- -'y Securities Registration Branch: and the successful candidate, !:lrs. Stephens, who has been doiw the job ior some xontks. And we received a copy of the position specification, xhirh is attached to this award. in a r.";- s$.el:, tke C;orli:ator eF.s‘;res tke efficient c;eratic;: ff t.2 ' e computerized regiszraticn system by mor.i:3ring its performance and sealing with problems whic:h arise. The ccor<inatcr m'cst azaiyze the problem ar.6 j,ecide what acticn is necessary - Ferkaps ca1l;r.g ~2.302 tile equi-,a~ent suoolier _ _ :o cozect 9 har<.wa:e ia:lt, 9r cal1ir.q .qcn the Syst2ns 3eos:e to cc:rec= 3 software fadt. In ,orcie: f3 ,ic this j-b 3. properly, the Coordinator must have sufficient technical knowledge and ability to identify the problem and to decide upon the action necessary. As well, the Coordinator must be able to communicate effectively with suppliers and Systems, and others, in order to explain clearly and concisely the nature of the problem, and 'the action required. The Selection Process In order to select the person for this position, the Employer first developed the detailed job specification. Then, Ms. I. 3artell0, who was then a Personnel lrojects Officer and Personnel Administrator in the Personnel Ser- vices Branch, and serviced the Personal Property Securities Registration Branch, met'with Mr. ioginow to discuss the manner of selection and the personal qualifications needed for the job. It was decided to have a written and oral interview, which would enable the panel to assess the fol- lowing criteria, weighted as shown: Technical Casabilities A. Technicai Sxperience 20 Xini-Computer Zxperience 10 2 : ?ro:ect/Tas:k Force X:x?erience 2 D. ?roducticn Flanr,inc 3 2. Short,'Long Term Planning ant . Tcrecssting 3 r". Tec.hr.ical Dof22nerraticn Xritbg 3 G. Budgetary:.~ccoun--no Prac+'cal Ezqeriexce i- 4 .Lbilities and .~.:tiiudes H. :iery Eetaii2d Ca~scious 12 1. .A.512 to Axalyse ?robiems 5zder ?z2ssi;z2 3 __ Relate to ?~~-'~ at .;11 ti. --.'A.- Levels 5 I K. Able t5 TTa:<cp 3irectisn 5 , 4. Personal Suitability7 i. Strong Technical and Pr-o- duction Orientation 11 M. Self-Motivated 4 N. Job Stability 10 100 At the interview, the candidates first spent one hour doing the written part of the process. The responses were studied by the panel -- Hs. Bartello, Hr. Loginow, and Mr. Meagher -- and then the panel interviewed each candidate individually, asking questions which came off a prepared interview sheet (the candidates-were unaware that such a prepared sheet existed). I am satisfied that the bulk of the questions which appear on this sheet were in fact.asked, and some additional questions gay also have been asked, at least of Xr. Lau. Iach panelist independently scored the candidates with respect to each criterion. They then met to discuss their scoring, and some minor changes were made. 70: 2x- ample, Xs. Bartello, who did not have a strcng technical ‘background, might :have chanced her scoring concernin a zechzical xatzer azter :hea;inc 5.e c-,izicn 2f !lessrs. Xe a 9 L 2r an2 Locinow. The raw scores we=2 multi>lied 5y t.:.e assiqr.ed weights, the totals were ta:k2n, ax? t5.a sane1 selactsd :?rs. S;eThens Secause ?.er scars was siczli:icai-.tl~7 :?lig?ler t:lar. anyone else, thtxph no candidate had a hich e.?oqi? score 20 be consider& fully cm.Lk-:ec -2:: -ne -c . . 5. In brief, Mr. Lau was.judged to have a stronger technical capability, but Mrs. Stephens was considered to be much stronger in those areas concerned with the ability to communicate with others. Arguments of the Parties On behalf of the grievor, Mr. Luczay suggested that the scoring system was inequitable because it favoured: those qualities strongest in Xrs. Stephens: that Hr. Lau's qualifications and abilities were really at least r2latively equal to Mrs. Stephens', given the needs of the job: and that , indeed, the Employer designed the process to put Mrs. Stephens into t1he position over Xr. Lau. On the other hand, on behalf of the Employer, >!r. Corff argued that the Empioyer undertook a fair and ex- haustive process to acquire enough iaformation to judge the relative qualifications and abilities of the candidates. .&nd that, having done this, it '*-as determineti that Xr. Stephens was a better person for the job. Conciusion 6. cate effectively is concerned, I share this concern after hearing his evidence. The grievor is a well-qualified tech- nician, and a fine gentleman, but we were forced repeatedly to ask him to clarify his answers or to address the question asked rather that discuss with us some other matter. He demonstrated a marked inability to answer questions directly and concisely. As well, I have reviewed carefully the written parts of the interview done by Nr. Lau and Mrs. Stephens (Exhibits 15 and 16). Insofar as it is possible to judge, I am satisfied that the scoring based on this saterial was fair and reasonable. I am also satisfied that tie panel members were well qualified to ,judge the candidate5 according to the criteria established (indeed, the griavor acknowladged this) and that the criteria were reasonable with res;iect to the job in question. 1.~ ::qe result, I find f:hat tl;.e selection >rccess was ?rcper arc :he ;r:evance is Ienied. . . 3rerton - !?ember ! concur 5. 3. 3uinan - :!erber 7. LIST OF EXHIBITS 1. Grievance Form, June 25, 1980 2. Replies, Stages 1 and 2 3. Letter to Mr. Dorff, December 14, L98L 4. Collective Agreement 5. Job posting 6. Grievor's resume 7. Interview scoring sheet a. Job specification: Data Base Services Coordinator 9. Organization Chart 10. Application for Employment, F.X. Stephens 11. Interview Questionnaire (written) 12. interview questions (verbal) 13. Completed score sheet (Lau) I?. Completed score sheet (Stephens) 15. Written examination iLau) i6. Written examination (Stephens) ii. Application for Employment, A. Lau