Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-0293.Bonello et al.86-03-21TE‘EP”O”6l 416/599-me 293/84 l IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT L ., . I .:. : ,., ,~ Between: Before: For the Grievor: For the Employer: Hearings: ,. Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT.BOARO ". " ' OPSEU (Antoine Bone110 et al) Grievors - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Government Serivices) Employer E. B. Jolliffe, Q.C. Vice-Chairman' P. Craven Member A. Reistetter Member R. Anand Counsel Cavalluzzo, Hayes & Lennon Barristers & Solicitors ;,,;ie;rown Crown Law Office, Civil Ministry.of the Attorney General July 31 and December 6. 1984 March 1 and June 14, 1985 v -2- DECISION These are classification grievances. Messrs.-A. Bonello, G. Giffin, H. Lin, G. Miller and B. Moore have the role of "Expenditure-Revenue Analysts" in the Cheque Reconciliation Section of the General Services Branch of the Ministry of Government Services. They maintain that they are improperly " i ,classified as Clerks 5 General (under section 18.(2) of. the.Crown..,.:::;. Employees Collective Bargaining Act) and claim that the proper I. . , . . . . : I . ., _.. ,, . . 1 '. .,,. ~.~:". .., ~ ,,: ,;, I, :; .._. .q..~ . . ;:,.:..i.. . . . . . . :.,> classification for their position would be 'Financial Of~ficer 1 (Bargaining Unit). The five grievors are the only Expenditure-Revenue Analysts currently employed by the Government, and their position is unique to the Ministry of Government Services. .Their job functions have evolved over time. Until 1977 the position was entitled Cheque Reconciliation Clerk, classified at the Clerk 4 L General level. The position title was then changed to Senior Cheque Reconciliation Clerk, classified Clerk 5 General. The position specification was rewritten in 1982, when the current title, Expenditure-Revenue Analyst, was assigned, but the classification of the position remains Clerk 5 General. The grievors contend that their duties have changed so substantially over time that they are no longer properly classified in the Clerical series'. Their case is that whereas their functions were ,i, ‘l‘i 1, I I .: -3 - at one time principally clerical in nature, they now carry responsibilities which are primarily problem-solving. The hearing was unusual in that the grievors did not themselves testify about the work. All testimony as to the grievors' duties came from supervisors and managers. The Board also received into evidence then report of a job audit conducted 'L by the Employera.f'ter'the filing of the grievances. It will be :~ ~. .~ ,discussed.,after.a,r,eview of testimony about the organization of . ...;.. the Ministry's operations and the nature of the grievors' work.' ' The Board heard testimony from Mr. Howard Hurson, Director of the General Services Branch in the Ministry of Government Services. Mr. Hurson began his career in the Ontario Public Service .in 1960. He has been Chief Classification Officer for Ontario, Director of Personnel with the Ministry of Public Works, and Personnel Director with the Ministry of Government Services. Mr. Hurson was Director of the Government Payments Branch of the Ministry from 1974 to 1982, when he became Director of the General Services Branch created in a reorganization., The General Services Branch consists of numerous sections, including Insurance and Risk Management, Collection Services, Food Services, an Administration Section, Official Documents, and the four sections which made .up 'the former Government Payments Branch. These four are Cheque Production, Cheque Signing and Mailing, Cheque Reconciliation and Cheque Replacement. These four sections are jointly responsible for processing and accounting for all Government payments through the Consolidated Revenue Fund, payments totalling perhaps a billion , d~ollars monthly. The Government draws cheques on 26 accounts at - the five major chartered banks. In addition, these sections are 'Y"" re's~potis.ibZ'e‘for c'onvert~ing payment..and.personne.l.da.ta ,fr.om.,all,.,,\, ,:,,.. the Ministries into computer-readable form. The Cheque Production section produces'all the cheques drawn on Consolidated ,Revenue Fund accounts: this amounts to between four thousand and five thousand cheques each day. These cheques are then transferred to the Cheque Signing and Mailing section, which re.tains signature plates, cheque requisition files and pay lists. The section affixes signatures to the cheques and arranges for mailing them to their payees. The Cheque Recon- ciliation section ensures that records of these transactions supplied by the banks, the Cheque Production section, and Central Accounts can be reconciled with the records of cheques issued. The Cheque Replacement section uses records generated in the reconciliation process in response to requests for the cancel- lation and replacement of cheques. ‘p L ‘L -5- Cheque Reconciliation at one tim’e required the actual handling of physical cheques and other paper records. Before 1980, the job involved manually ticking off -batches of cheques against an issue register. By the time of the grievances, however, the process had been thoroughly computerized. Under the current system, when a cheque is issued a record identified ~by cheque number and ‘date is added to a master computer file. The record remains on the master file until the cheque is either cashed or cancelled. When a cheque is presented to a bank for I .*. ,’ ? . . . . . . .;_, ,. ,,, : payment, the paying bank encodes the.“ohkq’uk w’ith’ide’ntify.ing ” information and the dollar amount. The bank then processes the cheque through a device that reads the encoded information and records it on a computer tape, which is ‘delivered to the Ministry. When a cheque is cancelled , a computer-readable record is also created. The computer-readable information that enters Cheque Reconciliation also includes records of bank deposits made by Ministries and Central Accounts and of authorized requisitions by various Ministries. The computer is programmed to compare cheques issued with cheques cashed and cancelled, and to compare Ministry deposi.ts with requisitions. The computer produces a series of reports on these comparisons, and these reports are the basic documents with which the Fxpenditure-Revenue Analysts do their work. -’ ,i, ’ iti -6- , Reduced to its essentials, the Expenditure'-Revenue Analyst's job has three main components. The Analyst must cause the computer to produce the desired reports, by submitting job requests in IBM's Job Control Language (JCL). The Analyst must examine the resulting reports to analyze inconsistencies between cheque issue and payment records, and to explain the origin of any inconsistency. This may in turn require the production of L additional computer reports or the examination-of. source .i ;"::~-documents.l.-..;Fin,ally.,.."the ~.Analyst must resolve any remaining inconsiitency by dealing directly with the originating insti- tution, be it the Cheque Production section, one or more of the banks, or another Ministry. In reconciling cheques, ~the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst is concerned exclusively with the question whether the accounts of cheques cashed and cancelled balance against the accounts Of cheques requested and issued. The Analyst is not concerned with '- such questions as whether a cheque was issued to the wrong payee or in the wrong amount, or whether it was improperly endorsed. The Board heard further testimony about the nature of the grievors' work from Ms. Elaine Sutton. She had begun in 1976 as a Cheque Reconciliation Clerk in the former GovernmentPay- ments Branch, at which time her position was classified Clerk 4 General. She became a Senior Cheque Reconciliation Clerk. - 7 - , classified Clerk 5 General, in 1977. She was promoted Acting Manager of the Cheque Reconciliation section in 1980, and Manager in 1981. This remains Ms. Sutton's formal title, although when she testified (and since July, 1984) she has been Acting Manager, Cheque Production. According to Ms. Sutton, the Cheque Reconciliation by section currently consists of five- Expenditure-Revenue Analysts -.l:b (the grievors), Fan .: i . . . .::.i .,.. .) ..,. ..; ,. ,., ., three Cheque Information Clerks (Clerks 2), one : ., I'..: ,_..,. . .., ._ .\ Supervisor, Cheque Filing (Clerk 3), and one Filing Clerk (Clerk : :/ ,. .,. ., . . 2). All these personnel report directly to the Manager, Cheque Reconciliation, except for the Filing Clerk, who reports to the Supervisor. At the time of the grievance, one of the grievors was Acting Manager, the same position Ms. Sutton had held in 1980. 'b MS. Sutton testified that since 1977 a substantial increase in the volume of cheques, the reorganization of the section, the introduction of the current computerized system, and certain changes in the banks all contributed to what she characterized as "drastic changes" in the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts. Many of these changes occurred in the Analysts' working relations with the banks. Whereas formerly the reconciliation clerk would have to deal only with.the banks' Current Accounts departments, now the Analysts must deal with the banks' Data Centres and Account Reconciliation Plans as well. Each of the five banks has its own idiosyncratic computer system, and each of the Government's 26 accounts is handled somewhat differently. In dealing with the banks, the Analysts interact with supervisors, operational personnel, and occasionally with section managers.. ems. Sutton testified that Analysts now,hold monthly meetingswith ~:~~ managerial-level bankers to resolve problems arising from certain .' .iGf i'ci;n,;.i'es ."in ;.&:; da'n~'~l.'-I..':""'.' ., -:, .I: .._ ::... ,. :.. :: :.. ;_.: _.: hi ..,.;... i.I'.I.I ,. account-balancing systems.~ The banks have apparently made alterations in their operations and procedures on the basis of recommendations made by Expenditure- Revenue Analysts. Ms. Sutton explained that the net effect of computerization of the banks, Central Account.s and the Government Payments operations~ was an increasing emphasis on the Analysts' "trouble-shooting" role. Where once the reconciliation clerks spent much of their time handling and examining bundles of cheques and marking them off against registers, now the bulk of the Analysts' time was spent in detecting errors, determining the responsibility for them, and arranging for them to be rectified. Each Analyst is responsible for arranging for the computer to update the master list with one bank's payment tapes. :: ,: - 9 - , In this phase of the work, which is conducted on a weekly basis, the Analyst is in contact with personnel at that bank. In the analysis phase.of the work, each Analyst is responsible for a particular set of accounts. For control and security reasons, no Analyst is responsible for analyzing all the accounts placed with the bank for whose computer runs he is responsible. Each oT the Analysts must be familiar with.all the different accounts and b bank systems with which the section deals. In addition to s .:.. '.. . . ._ '. :. ..:,: arranging. for computer runs involving the bank tapes, the ,. ,.,,., _, 1,: ‘. .I ” y:.. ;: : I, Analysts arrange for other computei- reports KeqUiKed by various Ministries on a regular or special basis. The Analysts produce monthly reports reconciling each of the 26 accounts. Work on the preparation of these reports occurs on a daily basis. Us. Sutton testified that each account has its own peculiarities, each bank operates in its own way and different personnel at the same bank may follow different b procedures for making corrections. In performing the analytic function, the Analyst must be ableto determine and anticipate how bank personnel will handle such matters. Because the issues and problems arising are often unique, and because of the variations in practice among and within banks,~there can be no fixed procedures governing the final reconciliation of the accounts. -- r . - 10 - The Grievors are also responsible for analyzing discrepancies that result from the operations of Central Accounts and the Cheque Production section. This work is also conducted on a daily basis. The Analyst will be in touch with the Central I Accounts supervisor three OK four times a month, and with Cheque Production at least weekly. from time to time Analysts will appearincourtasexpertwitnesses toprovecheques in fraud and - forgery prosecutions. . . x ..' : .'. .~ ,a\ ..::,. i :., ,.~. ~, ., ., '. "' " ._: i. ,:. ,..,,. At some time in 1982, Mr. Hurson and Ms'.'.$utt'~n'a'ggeeed 'I. ". .V that the duties and responsibilities of the Senior Reconciliation Clerks (as the grievers' jobs were then known) had changed so substantially that the existing position specification was outdated and needed revision. Ms. Sutton testified she was particularly concerned that the existing position specification (exhibit 5) failed to express the degree to which the job required the exer~cise of independent judgement and decision- making. In consultation with the grievors, Mr. Hurson and Ms. .Sutton prepared a new position specification bearing the current job title, Expenditure-Revenue Analyst, and submitted it fOK classification. When it was. KetUKned with the same classification as the former position specification --- Clerk 5 General --- Mr. Hurson wrote to Mr. Ed. Molloy, Classification Officer in the Personnel Branch of the Ministry, complaining that ll- _ the position was "badly underclassified" and asking him to justify the decision (exhibit 9.1 Mr. Hurson felt that the Clerk 5 General classification had been placed too low and in the wrong class series. He took the view that it would be impossible to recruit able staff at the Clerk 5 level without more than a year of additional on-the-job training. Mr. Hurson testified that he received no answer to this memorandum. Subsequently, in March 1983, Mt. Hurson wrote to Mr. I : ~. Molloy again (exhibit lo).' The principal topic“df' this memorandum was Mr. Hurson's concern that Ms. Sutton's position was underclassified. In this memorand'um Mr. Hurson reiterated .his earlier concern about the grievers' classification and his request for justification. The grievances were filed in January, 1984. A step 2 meeting was held ori February 21, 1984, at which time the Employer decided to conduct a "desk audit" of the position. Assigned to conduct the audit, Ms..Diane Maynard completed it prior to March 30, 1984. The grievors and their supervisors reviewed Ms. Maynard's draft report (exhibjt 11) and made a number of amendments and revisions. The amended version (exhibit 12) was signed by the grievors, Mr. Hurson and Ms. Sutton as an accurate 'description of the duties and responsibilities of the position since May, 1982. Neither Mr. Hurson nor Ms. Sutton signed the - 12 - new Position Specification Form attached to the audit report. Mr. Hurson testified he was reluctant to sign it because to.do so might be taken to indicate that the new responsibilities began as of the date of signing, although he had been pressing for two years to have the job re-evaluated. In any event, the grievors, their supervisor, and their Branch Director agreed that the revised audit report in exhibit 12 accurately described the job at the time of the grievance. '.' There w'as some'disagreementLatz'the..heari'ng oril-~whether 1 , exhibit 12 was drafted by the grievors in reply to Ms. Maynard's draft audit (exhibit 11) or whether exhibit 12 was a revision of the draft prepared by Ms. Maynard in consultation with the grievors. We have considered the testimony of Mr. Hurson, Ms. Sutton and Mr. John Chris Renaud (Manager of Personnel Adminis- tration, . Ministry of Government Services) on this point, and the reply evidence of one of the grievors, Mr. Giffin. We are satis- fied that~ whatever may have been the history of its drafting, exhibit 12 represents the, final version of ~the "desk audit" of the grievers' position. The desk audit is a document prepared by the Employer, and in this case the grievors agree that it accur- I ately reflects their duties and responsibilities at the relevant I time. In our opinion, exhibit 12 is the best evidence placed before us of the nature of the~grievors' work, and it has been of I some assistance to us. - 13 - The Class Standards .i*;-.i .,: This grievance must be determined in accordance with the class standards. The grievors claim that the work they perform, as disclosed in the job audit, is not properly encompassed by the Clerk 5 General class standard (exhibit 3). They further claim that their work properly falls within the class standard for Financial Officer 1 (exhibit 4). This Board has the ,' responsibility of interpreting and applying the Employer's class standards, thus determining whether the position occupied by the grievors is improperly classified in its existing classification. The preamble to the Clerical,~ Typing, Stenographic and Secretarial Class Series states that "these five series cover all office positions and office supervisory positions that are not covered by a spe.cialized clerical, technical, equipment operation, or professional class series." With respect to the General Clerical series, the Preamble states: This series covers positions where the purpcse is to perform clerical work entirely or in combination with incidental typing, stenographic or machine operating duties. Where exclusion of the latter would significantly change,the character of a position, or where they occupy a large proportion of the working time, the position should be assigned to one of the specialized classes, e.g. Clerical Typist. Positions for which specialized clerical series exist, e.g. Clerk, Mail and Messenger, Clerk, Filing etc. should not be assigned to this series. Group leader - 14 - responsibility normally begins at the third level, while the fourth and above usually cover positions involving line supervision: however, non-supervisory positions can also be included. The Class Definition for Clerk 5 General is as follows: Employees +n positions allocated to this class perform responsible clerical work requiring detailed knowledge of a body of regulations, statutes or local practices, together with a thorough understanding of the objectives of the work unit. Decision-making involves judgment in the interpre- tation or application of policy or administrative directives to problems where the intent of existing instructions is i . . obscure in specific cases. This frequently necessitates mcdifying work processes or the development of new methods. Although the work is carried out with a large degree of independence, it is reviewed for consistency of decision- making. Difficult technical questions, or those involving policy determination are referred to supervisors. Tasks typical of this level include responsibility for a significant non-supervisory, clerical, or clerical accounting .function involving the interpretation, explanation and appli- cation of a phase of departmental legislation or regulations and requiring the ability to make acceptable recommendations or provide functional advice: supervising a group of "journeyman clerks" performing clerical duties of varying complexity ora smaller group engaged in more specialized work by planning, assigning and reviewing work, deciding priorities, maintaining production levels and carrying responsibility for the total performance of the unit. The Preamble to the Financial Officer l-3 (Bargaining Unit) series provides: mis series covers positions of employees working in a non- managerial capacity whose duties and responsibilities as Financial Officers normally fall.withinoneormoreofthe follcving areas: ,. .: ‘. : - 15 - External Audit - involving the examination of financial and related records in agencies outside the jurisdiction of a Beputy Minister, to ensure compliance with statutory or other -requirements and the subsequent reporting of audit findings. Budget - involving the analysis of expenditures and revenues: the preparation and assembly of estimates including long-term forecasts; the monitoring of actual results and provision’of advice on various aspects of the budgetary process. Financial Information Systems - involving the review and improvement of accounting systems; the analysis of financial information reports or operational problems and the recommendation or development of new reporting systems: the view of forms and procedures in use: the provision of liaison between the accounting unit and program managers. General Accounting - involving responsibility for the accounting for expenditures and revenue: the development and administration of accounting procedures for reviewing grant claims, including monitoring payments made at various project stages: the provision of financial management for ministry programs. Specialist - involving the provision of advice and guidance on matters relating to a particularly complex aspect of accounting, e.g. taxation. EXCLUSICN FRY24 THE SERIES: Excluded are positions: (i) where the primary responsibilities are bookkeeping OY accounts processing activities such as accounts payable, receivable or payroll; (ii) management positions excluded under the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act; (iii) internal auditor positions (excluding under C.E.C.B.A., Bection 1 (ml (ill. The Class Standard for Financial Officer 1 (Bargaining Unit) is as follows: This class covers positions involving working level accounting assignments which are subject to supervision whether employees are working on assignments by themselves or assisting more senior financial offices. These employees work within defined limits on assignments which are usually reviewed for conformity to standards. Decisions are normally confined to technical mattersand subject to approval, e.g. decisions relating to sources of information and the method to be adopted for presenting material in report form. Some initiative and judgement is required in, for example, following up to determine the accuracy and acceptability of statistical data. Employees are accountable for carrying out assignments as directed, with accuracy and speed and with progressively improving technical ability. Errors at this level, could result in delay or disrupting in the work of the unit. Contacts are with other accounting staff and, in some cases, with program managers, for purposes of exchanging information and providing suggestions for revising procedures. In some positions there are external contacts, e.g. with school board officials, for purposes of exchanging information and explaining ministry needs with respect to documentation and data. Employees require sufficient knowledge of general accounting methods, practices and relevant legislation, .plus analytical skills, .in order to carry out aksignments in one or more of the defined areas in the accounting field. A good basic knowledge of auditing techniques is required in some positions. Typical assignments at this level are as follars: examine the records of appointed motor vehicle licence issuing officers and prepare report, noting any financial irregularities or other aspects of the licence issuing operation which might need further investigation: make a detailed review of financial statements or claims, resolving discrepancies and ensuring accuracy and conformity with regulations. assist in the preparation and control of a significant portion of the ministry budget e.g. division or branch with large expenditures and revenues, b+’ researching and analyzing data and preparing financial reports, forecasts and submissions. - 17 - C undertake assignments in preparing and monitoring revisions to accounting systems, analyzing information reports and advising program managers regarding the implications of findings. carry out varied assignments, such as project accounting including the reconciliation of accounts and the preparation of statements. Clerical Work The first question to be determined by this Board is whether the grievors’ job is improperly classified at the Clerk 5 General level. The grievors take the position that work encompassed by the Clerk 5 General standard is clerical work. They take clerical work to be work that involves consistency, repetitiveness, and relatively little exercise of independent judgement and initiative. They view their own work, ,by contrast, .- as requiring analysis, auditing (in the broad sense of exhibit 12: “a regular examination and analysis of accounts”) and the exercise of judgement and initiative. : We, might say at the outset that while repetition and limited judgement and initiative nay be characteristic of the lower levels of clerical work, these elements are not necessarily characteristic of clerical work in general. The test of inclusion within the clerical series is stated in the first - 18 - paragraph of the Preamble: the series covers “all office positions... that are not covered by a specialized clerical, technical, equipment operating, or professional class series.” It is plain to us that the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position falls within “office positions,” so the questio’n whether it is properly classified as clerical must depend at least in part upon whether it is covered by a specialized class series. The Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position is not an equipment-operating or professionalposition. “Specialized clerical” is nowhere expressly defined in the Clerical series standard but examples of what is meant by the term are provided in the preamble thereto: “Positions for which specialized clerical series exist, e.g. Clerk, Mail and Messenger, Clerk Filing, etc. should not be assigned to ~this series.” In our view, the grievors’ position falls outside the range of Such .- examples, and is not to be considered a “specialized clerical” position. The remaining question to be answered is whether the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position falls within a *technical” series. “Technical” is not defined within the clerical series preamble. Among the definitions supplied by the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, one is particularly suggestive in the present context: I . . L Ld ‘.- . - 19 - Belonging or relating to an art or arts: appropriate or peculiar to, or characteristic of, a particular art, science, profession, or occupation... Technical work is work involving the use of special techniques characteristic of the particular occupation. The “technical” exclusion from the clerical series standard has to do specifi- cally with office work of a technical character. We have no difficulty in stating, on the basis of the desk audit and of oral testimony about the grievors’ work, that the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst requires the application of specialist techniques in preparing JCL submissions for the computer and in tracing the source of errors. We find that it is office work of a technical character. However, the provision in the clerical series preamble does not exclude all office work of a technical character from the series, but onl-y positions that are covered by a technical class series. ‘It is conceivable that persons might be performing technical office work that is-not covered by a technical class series, so that their positions could be properly classified within the clerical series. We are satisfied that the Financial Officer series is a technical class series within the meaning of the Clerical series preamble. Financial Officers perform office work of a technical ‘- ic- . - 20 - character, making use of special accounting and analytic techniques characteristic of the occupation. It follows that if the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position is properly classified within the Financial Officer se,ries, then it is improperly classif ied within the Clerical series. Of course, the grievors’ position would be improperly classified if the specific classification within the Clerical series --- Clerk 5 General --- inadequately covered the d,uties and responsibilities of the position , even though the position came within the coverage of the clerical series as a whole. However, we must attempt to determine whether the Expenditure- Revenue Analyst position properly falls within the standard for Financial Officer 1, the classification sought by the grievors. Financial Officer First to be decided is whether the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst Position falls within the general coverage of the Financial Officer l-3 class series, as defined i’n the Preamble. The Employer argued that the position is expressly excluded from the series by provision (i), which excludes positions “where the primary responsibilities are bookkeeping or - accounts processing activities such as accounts payable, i’ ., r .I - . - 21 - receivable or payroll." This exclusion must be read in the context of the "General Accounting" area within the preamble, which includes within the series positions involvi,ng "responsibility for the accounting for expenditures and revenue; the development and administration of accounting procedures for reviewing grant claims, including monitoring payments made at various project stages; the provision of fina.ncial management for L ministry programs." Moreover it must be read in the context of the Financial Officer 1 (Bargaining Unity) class standard, w,hich provides that "this class covers positions involving working level accounting assignments..." There need be no inconsistency among these exclusive and~inclusive provisions, so long as the exclusion is construed narrowly.~ The work of the Expenditure- Revenue Analyst does not include bookkeeping or such accounts processing activities as accounts payable, receivable or payroll. Accordingly, we find that the position is not expressly excluded from the coverage.bf the Financial Officer series by the first exclusion provision. The position is not subject to the second (management positions) or third (internal auditor positions) exclusion provisions. The preamble to the Financial Officer series lists five “areas” within one or more of which the duties and responsibilities of employees in the series *normally" fall. Of these, the grievors place particular reliance on the "Financial Information Systems" area. This area has five components: ri L. - 22 - 1. “Review and improvement of accounting SyStemSa” It is claimed that the grievers’, work is covered by this provision because they identify specific problems in the accounting systems of their Branch and of the various banks (and, to a lesser degree, of Central Accounts) as they are revealed by the cheque reconciliation process, and they make suggestions for changes in these systems to ensure that the same problems do not recur in L- future. 2. “Analysis of financial information reports .or operational problems”. It is claimed that the grievors’ work is covered by this provision because they analyze financial reports originating in Cheque Production, Central Accounts and the various banks, and analyze problems in bank operation as revealed by the cheque reconciliation process. 3. “Recommendation or development of new reporting L systems.” It is claimed that the grievers’ work is covered by this provision because they have suggested changes in the way the Cheque Production section handles manual issues, and have devised ways of reporting financial information concerning the state of various accounts and their interrelationships. 4. “Review of forms and procedures in use.” It is claimed that the grievors’ work is covered by this provision .._ - 23 - because they collectively designed the set of forms they use for the preparation of monthly reports (exhibit L3). , 5. "Provision of liaison between the accounting unit and program managers." It is claimed that the ,grievors' work is covered by this provision because they are constantly in contact with managers at the banks, the Ministries, Central Accounts, and k.- their own Branch, and meet with the managers of such Government programmes as ONTP, GAINS and the Sales Tax programme to respond to specific reporting requirements. In cross-examination, Ms. Sutton indicated that aspects of the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts' work fit to a greater or lesser extent within the other areas set out in the preamble to the Financial Officer series. ‘,i.’ In respec-t of the External Audit area, while the L grievors have certain "audit" responsibilities (in the general terms of exhibit 12) they do not relate to agencies outside the jurisdiction of a Deputy Minister. They report their findings, with recommendations, to the originator of the error or problem. In respect of the Budget area, the grievors are not involved in the preparation or analysis of budgets, but they do ~- -- ,~ - .7 L. - 24 - analyze and estimate their requirements for computer time on a monthly cost basis and keep within those allocations. ./ In respect of the General Accounting area, the grievors -play a part in expenditure accounting through the reconciliation of payments with requests for payment, and in revenue accounting through the reconciliation of incoming revenues against bank deposits and Central Accounts postings. They are not involved in the review of grant claims or in providing financial management for ministry programmes. In respect of the Specialist area, the grievors make procedural recommendations applicable to matters internal to their Branch. The Employer introduced evidence about the typical i., duties of Financial- Officers in the Ministry of Government Services through Mr. Mack Colin Richardson, currently Acting Director of the Internal Audit Branch in the Ministry of Government Services. In a nutshell, Mr. Richardson’s evidence was to the effect that the Financial Officers he has supervised have performed more complex and technically-demanding work than do the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts. It is not necessary to consider Mr. Richardson’s evidence in detail, since we find on 0 ,? , ’ I G - 25 - the preamble to the Financial Officer series that the Expenditure- Revenue Analyst position is not covered by that class series. While we accept Ms. Sutton's evidence that some of the work the Analysts are called upon to perform fits to an extent within certain areas set out in the preamble, we find that the grievors' core responsibilities do not fall within the series. 'v Those responsibilities, as outlined above, are': Ii) to prepare and submit computer job requests; (ii) to analyze and explain reconciliation errors identified in the computer reports; and (iii) to resolve such errors'by dealing with the originating institution. There is some overlapping between the grievers' responsibilities and those of Financial Officers, and certain analogies may be drawn between the two types of work. Neverthe- less, it is our considered opinion that the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst is not the kind of work contemplated by the Financial Officer series. Clerk 5 General To recapitulate, we have found that Expenditure-Revenue Analysts perform office work of a technical character of the sort that is covered by the General Clerical series, absent an appropriate specialized series. We have found that the Financial Officer series covers specialized technical office work excluded c. : ,; ,’ :. y,, ,.:( - 26 - from the C lerica 1 series. We have determined that the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts does not come within the scope of the Financial Officer series. We turn now to the question whether it is incorrectly classified by virtue of being assigned to the wrong grade within'the clerical series. In classification grievances, the Board frequently has the benefit of testimony by the Employer's classification officers concerning the character of the Employer's classifi- cation system. In this matter, we heard evidence from Mr. John Chris Renaud, who is currently Manager of Personnel Adminis- tration inthe Personnel Branch of the Ministry of Government Services. It is now well understood by the Board that the Employer uses a grade description system for the classification of positions. We understand that classification officers first determine to which~-class series a position should be assigned, \-- and then in which level within that series it belongs. Mr. Renaud considers.that the general clerical series is the appropriate series for the grievors' position, and that Clerk 5 General is the correct level. On the other hand, Mr. Howard Hurson, Director of the Branch, who has had many years of experience as Chief Classificaton Officer and as a Personnel Director, made it clear that he considered the position to be "badly under- classified," (Exhibits 9 and 10). ‘- - 27 - We turn how to the applicability of the Class Definition for Clerk 5 General to the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position. While we must ultimately make a determination on the basisof the standard as a whole, it may be helpful for purposes of analysis to break down the definition as follows: Employees in positions allocated to this class A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. 0. perform responsible clerical work requiring detailed knowledge of a body of regulations, statutes or local practices, together with a thorough understanding of the objectives of the work unit. Decision-making involves judgment in the interpretation, and application of policy .- or administrative directives to problems'. where the intent of existing instructions is obscure in specific cases. This frequently necessitates modifying work processes or the development of new methods. Although the work is carried out with a large degree of independence, it is reviewed for consistency of decision-making. Difficult technical questions,. -2B- P. or those involving policy determination Q. are referred to supervisors. We have already determined that the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst is "clerical" work for the purposes of the class standard only insofar as it is not encompassed,by some more specialized technical class series. The description in (A), while accurately reflecting the responsible nature of the work,, fails to describe its specialization and complexity. The position requires detailed knowledge, as in (E), but the knowledge required is not of regulations or statutes (Cl. Detailed knowledge of local practices --- specifically the practices of the Government Payments Branch, client Ministries, Central Accounts, and the various banks --- is clearly required. It is no doubt important that Expenditure-Rev,enue Analysts under- stand that their group's objective is to ensure that cheque ~- issues balance payments, but this requirement can hardly be dignified in terms of thoroughness (D), or placed on a par with the knowledge requirement. Expenditure-Revenue Analysts must have a thorough understanding of the work unit's operations, and its relationship with the operations of other units in the Branch. The decisions which Expenditure-Revenue Analysts are called upon to make do require the exercise of judgement (E), but - 29 - j;; .x-i. ‘b not principally on (F) of policy (H) or of in the interpretati administrative directive (I). Not- is their judgement exercised principally in the application (G) of policy or administrativ~e directives. Their judgement is exercised analytically in the tracking down of problems to their source and in devising approp- riate solutions; and diplomatically, in conveying those solutions to the problem-causers. Their work is problem-oriented (J), but the problems do not arise out of the obscurity of existing instructions (K), since there are no instructions applicable to the majority of the problems they encounter. awhile it is an important part of their job to encourage others to modify work processes or implement new methods in order to solve existing problems, the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts do not frequently modify their own work processes or methods or those of their unit (L). .- Expenditure-Revenue Analysts work with a large degree of independence (Ml. The work is not reviewed for consistency of decision-making (N). Analysts are expected to resolve difficult technical questions (0) themselves; “Only the very complex and unusual problems are referred to the Manager for assistance” (0; Exhibit 12). The work does not involve quest ions of policy determination (P). - . - 30 - The Class Definition of the Clerk 5 General standard fits the position of Expenditure-Revenue Analyst poorly in several respects and indifferently~ over all. This conclusion is strengthened by a consideration of the “typical tasks” section of the standard. There are two kinds of tasks described: one is ’ supervisory, and of no relevance here; the other involves “the interpretation, explanation and application of a phase of L departmental legislation or regulations," which is far removed from the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst's job.: In our opinion it ,is not without significance that, according to Exhibit 3, the Class Standard for Clerk 5 General was last "Revised, December, 1963," more than two decades ago. There is not a word in either the preamble to the series or the standard itself taking notice of the advent of the computer ,age. Obviously vast changes in banking practice as well as office L technology have-occurred since 1963, some of which are necessarily reflected in the duties and responsibilities of the Expenditure-Revenue Analysts. It seems clear that the language of certain standards has failed to keep pace with changing conditions and requirements. of work. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that the Standard for Financial Officer I, (Exhibit 4) appears to have been revised in January, 1980. - 31 - On all the evidence woe find that the work of the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst is more technically. specialized and complex, involves the exercise of more judgement, and is 1 ess closely supervised than the work contemplated by the Clerk 5 General standard. Moreover, Ex,penditure-Revenue Analysts are called upon to resolve a different class of problems than the .-. standard contemplates. These differences are sufficiently pronounced to compel the conclusion that the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst position is improperly classified as Clerk 5 General. The Question of Remedy We have determined that the grievors’ position is improperly classified in its existing classification. We have also determined that the position would not be properly .- ‘L classified in the position the grievors seek. We are called upon now to determine whether the Colletitive Agreement between the parties effedtively precludes us from supplying;a remedy in these circumstances. The relevant provisions in Article 5 are the fo llowing: - 32 - 5.1.1 An employee who alleges that his position is improperly classified may discuss his claim with his immediate supervisor at any time, provided that such discussions shall not be taken into account in the application of the time limits set out in Article 27 (Grievance Procedure). An employee, however, shall have the right to file a grievance in accordance with the grievance procedure, specifying in his grievance what classification he claims. 5.1.2 In the case of a grievance filed under the above section, .the authority of the Grievance Settlement Beard shall be limited to: (a) confirming that the grievor is properly classified in an existing classification, or (b) finding that the grievor would be properly classified in the job classification which he claimed in his grievance. Classification grievances are also provided for in the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, s. 18(2): In addition to any other rights of grievance under a collective agreement, an employee claiming, (a) that his position has been imprcperly classified: . . . . . may process such matter in accordance with the grievance procedure provided in the collective agreement, and failing final determination under such procedure, the matter may be processed.in accordance with the procedure for final determination applicable under section 19. For the Union, Mr. Anand argued that were the Board to find that neither the existing classification nor the classification sought by the grievors is the proper one, we have the jurisdiction under s. 18(2) of the Act to issue a remedial -- .L ’ - 33 - order requiring the Employer to classify the grievors properly. He argued that to the extentthatthere is a conflictbetweenthe provision in Article 5.1.2 of the Collective Agreement and the statute, it must be resolved~in favour of the statutory right. In support of this proposition he cited, inter alia, the decision of the Ontario Divisional Court in Ontario Public Service Employee~s Union v The Queen in riqht of Ontario et al. 40 O.R. -- - -- L (2nd) 142, known as the Brecht decision, wherein Callaghan J. said for the Court: "Where a right to grieve a particular matter is specifically recognized by legislation it ought not to be restricted absent a clear intention on the part of the legis- lature to do SO." Similarly, in Ontario Public Service Employees Union and the Crown in right of Ontario et al. 44 O.R. (2dl 51, ------ - the Divisional Court quashed a decision of this Board, stating that "We have no doubt that s. lS(2) of the statute applies notwithstanding the existence of the collective agreement . . . To ‘L the extent the board based itself on the view that art. 5 of the agreement limits the operation of s. 18(2), we believe they are wrong." (At 53, per Osler J.1 Mr. Anand maintained the fact that the grievors based their claim on the provisions of Article 5 was not the end of the matter, and he urged us to decide the grievances by requiring the Employer to classify the grievors properly. - 34 - For the Employer, Mr. Brown maintained that. this Board's jurisdiction is limited by the provision in Article 5.1.2.of the Collective Agreement. Were the Board to order the Employer to classify the grievors properly, the Employer would have to find some existing classification in which they fit, place them in an "atypical" classification, or create a new class. Such an order would offend against the intent of the parties as expressed in 'i their Collective Agreement. The Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, by section 18(l)(a), makes the classification of positions an exclusive ,employer function. By section 18(2)(a) it gives employees the right to have a grievance alleging improper classification determined finally by this Board. It is very clear that the Legislature intended (1) to ensure that the employer exercise its exclusive function of classifying i. positions, and (2,to provide a forum in which an improperly- classified employee could find a remedy. To the extent that the Collective Agreement purports to limit employees' access to a remedy, hit must give way to the 'broader intent of the Legislature. This is the case whether or not grievors make specific reference to Article 5 in the wording of their grievances. We conclude that we have the power to supply an . - 35 - appropriate remedy to employees who are improperly classified. The appropriate remedy for improper classification can only Abe proper classification. Remedial Considerations We have already determined that the Expenditure-Revenue Analyst positions is covered by the General Clerical series, unless there exists a specialized technical series covering the work of the position. Within the Clerical series, we have determined that the grievors are improperly classified at the C'ler'k 5 General level because their work involves greater complexity and specialization, a wider exercise of judgement, a different class of problems and greater freedom from supervision than work at that .level. It follows that the grievors would be properly classified in a specialized technical series covering the kind of work they perform or, if there is no such series, at a level within the General Clerical series commensurate with the complexity, specialization, range of judgement, problem- orientation and freedom from supervision of the position. I - 36 - This Board is not aware of a specialized technical series covering the work of the position. We have had a great deal of experience in classification matters affecting the Clerical series, however, and we are aware of the standard for Clerk 6 General, which provides: Employees in positions allocated to this class perform specialized complex clerical or sub-professional work which forms a significant part of the administration of the organizationconcerned. Decision-making requires the analysis of complex problems in specialized clerical fields or arise from the supervision of a large staff where the volume, variety and complexity of the duties is extensive. Considerable judgment in~the interpretation and application of a wide variety of regulations, statutes or practices is necessary toresolvetheseproblems. The work is reviewed through standardized reporting procedures, principally to assess the contribution made to branch administration. We have found that the grievors are improperly classified in their present classification. They have asked us .- to issue a remedial order requiring the Employer to classify them properly. Having regard to all the.circumstances of the present grievance, we do not consider that such an order would 'place too ' onerous a burden on the Employer or amount to an unacceptable interference in an area of sole Employer discretion. Accordingly the Board declares that the grievors are improperly classified as Clerks 5 General and orders the Employer to classify them properly, having regard to the facts found by - 3-l - this Board. The new classification is to be made retroactive to the date of the grievances. We remain seized in order to assist. the parties should they encounter any difficulty in implementing this decision. Dated at Rockwood, Ontario this Zlst day of March, 1986 ‘k c P. Craven, Memh.+r A. Reistetter, Member