Grievance Case Summary - G-1148-1-148-2-149-150

The Committee received four grievances involving a total of eight civilian members in relation to the reclassification of their position. One of these grievances was a collective grievance involving five members. The Committee joined two of the other grievances, submitted by individual members, in one grievance report as the issues were identical. The other grievance was treated separately. The issues in all of these grievances were sufficiently similar for them to be grouped together.

The Grievors were classified within a civilian member sub-group. After consultation with the Force, Treasury Board made changes to the classification standard and the pay levels for this sub-group. Among the changes was the elimination of separate levels within the sub-group for the Grievors' positions. Also, instead of receiving a salary-tie to the "police universe"--a change which was implemented for the other positions within the sub-group--position-holders in the levels being eliminated were to continue to have a public service salary-tie; this was implemented with the intent of granting salary protection to these position-holders. Pursuant to these changes, the Force reclassified the members' positions under the revised classification standard, thus grouping the Grievors within the same levels as other members in the sub-group.

Although the Grievors raised different arguments, the principal reasons why the members felt aggrieved were that they had been given no opportunity for input about the nature of their duties; their new role descriptions--the new common role descriptions for all the members of the sub-group--did not reflect the actual distinct nature of their duties; their standing had been reduced; their career path had been blocked; and the implementation of a different salary-tie had put them at a financial disadvantage.

On October 24, 1995, the ERC issued its findings and recommendations. The ERC determined that the central issue falling within the Committee's mandate was the reclassification of the positions and, most particularly, the correct comparison of the Grievors' actual duties against the classification standard. Although Treasury Board established the classification standard, the classification of the positions under the standard, including the correct determination and comparison of the members' duties, was the Force's role. The ERC concluded that there had been an error in process in the reclassification: the Force had failed to verify that the actual nature of the Grievors' duties corresponded with the role description under the new classification standard; there had been no operational-level confirmation of the Grievors' duties. The ERC recommended that the grievances be upheld on this ground. The ERC recommended that the reclassification notices for the Grievors' positions be cancelled and that the position classifications be returned to the same status they had prior to the issuance of the notices. The Force would have to determine what steps to take at that point; this would include the determination, by the Force, of the true nature of the Grievors' duties.

In additional comments, the ERC observed that there had been inadequate consultation with the Grievors about the nature of their duties; while the decisions in this regard must rest with Force management, modern management practice emphasizes communication with all stakeholders; The ERC recognized that the Force was now taking steps to improve its implementation of such practices. The ERC also questioned the input which had been given to Treasury Board leading to the revision of the classification standard; the review leading to this input appeared to have been lacking with respect to the Grievors' positions. In addition, The ERC observed that despite having duties equal to other members of the sub-group, and apparently having other duties in addition, members at the Grievors' former level were the only ones denied a salary-tie to the "police universe". The ERC pointed out that salary protection for the Grievors could be implemented without depriving them of the salary-tie given to other members of the sub-group. The ERC suggested that the above additional comments be considered in the Force's determination of the appropriate steps to take after the recommended cancellation of the reclassification notices.

On March 8, 1996, the Commissioner rendered his decision. In two grievances, the Commissioner determined that the manner in which the grievances had been framed prevented two Grievors from having standing. Nevertheless, he observed that the other similar grievances were not constrained by this technical problem and that the two Grievors could take advantage of the effect of the decisions in the other grievances. In the other grievances, the Commissioner concluded that there had been an error of fact and process. The evidence showed that translation continues to be a significant part of the Grievors' duties. Further, the form used to verify the Grievors' duties against the role description was not completed. The Commissioner directed that the classification be redetermined by verifying the actual duties performed against the classification standard.