y . ;:.' '''.;. y '';1. c .<'" . . .,.y

264) Hearing Date of Award

INNISFIL TWP. Oct. 15, 1985

85-07-)IN THE MATTER OF THE POLICE ACT

R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 381

AND IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION

Between

THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF POLICE FOR THE TOWNSHIP OF INNISFIL . (hereinaftercalled the "Board")

-and-

THE INNISFIL TOWNSHIP POLICE ASSOCIATION (hereinafter called the "Association")

AND IN THE MATT'ER OF THE 1985 COLLECTIVE AGREElVIENT (Civilian Employees)

.ARBITRATOR: DR. ARJUN P. AGGARWAL

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE BOARD:

Mr. B. R. Baldwin - Counsel

Mr. R. J. Gilroy - Chairman

Mr. G. A. Andrade - Member

Chief M. Pearson - Chief of Police

FOR THE ASSOCIATION:

Mr. James M. Kingston - Spokesperson

Const. Doug Lougheed - Chairman-Bargaining Committee

Const. Kerry Emms - President

Mr. Daniel Gilbert

Mr. James Mason - Civilian Member

The hearing in this matter was held on September 20, 1985, in Barrie, Ontario.

AWARD

The undersigned was appointed by the Solicitor-

General, Honourable Ken Keyes, on July 31, 1985, pursuant

to section 32 of the Police Act, R. S. o. 1980, Chapter

381, to act as an arbitrator to hear and determine all

m"atters in di.spute between the parties relating to their

1985 Collective Agreement negotiations. The hearing in

this matter was held in Barrie, Ontario, on September 20,

1985. At the outset the representatives of the parties

agreed that the arbitrator had been properly appointed

and that the time limits prescribed by the Act for the

commencement of the arbitration hearing had been complied

witho It was also agreed that the issues before this

arbitrator are for the Collective Agreement for the year

1985, i.e. from 1st of January to 31st of December, 1985.

INTRODUCTION

Innisfil Township is located approximately 55 miles

North of Toronto just South of the City of Barrie. The

Township is a municipality covering approximately 90 square

miles encompassing approximately 56,000 acres. Within that

area is approximately 240 miles of roads of which 40 miles

are maintained by the Province; 40 miles maintained by the

County of Simcoe and approximately 160 miles maintained by

the Township.

-J-

The population of Innisfil Township is approximately

lJ,OOO permanent residents with a seasonal population that

nearly doubles during the summer months. Most of the Town­

ship population is located in several small communities

adjacent to the nearly 20 miles of shoreline on the east

and north sides of the Township.

The Innisfil Township Police Force is comprised of

20 uniform officers and 7 civilians as follows:

Uniform Officer Civilian Employees

1 Police Chief 5 Dispatchers

1 Staff Sergeant 1 Community Service Officer

J Sergeants 1 Executive Secretary

15 Constables

Although the civilian employees of the Force are

members of the Association, and bargain together with the

uniform officers, they are covered by a separate Collective

Agreement. This award deals only with the terms and con­

ditions of the Collective Agreement for the civilian

employees.

Out of seven civilian employees - six (6) men and

one (1) woman - only six (6) are in the bargaining unit.

All are sworn special constables. All the dispatchers

-4­

have been to the Ontario Police College and successfully

completed the Advanced CPIC Training Course. The average

age of the civilians on the Innisfil Police Force is 50

years of age; and average length of service is eight (8)

years.

As the negotiations failed over the uniform officers'

Collective Agreement, it appears that no serious attempts

were made to settle the civilian employees Collective

Agreement.

At the hearing before the arbitrator each of the

parties submitted extensive written briefs which were

supported by exhibits and charts. They were then afforded

full opportunity to make presentations in support of

their respective positions.

The parties agreed that the following issues remained.

still unresolved and were before the arbitrator for his

determination:

1. Management Rights - Article 2 (b)

2. Hours of Work - Article J

3. Annual Vacation - Article 54. Lon~ Term Disability - Article 8 (c)

5. Insurance - Article 9 (a) (V)

-5­

6. Salary Schedule - Article 13

7. Special allowance - Article 14

8. Member's Personal File - New

9. Uniformed Special Constable - New

(a) Salary

(b) Cleaning Allowance

ISSUE NUMBER ONE

Management Rights - Article 2 (b)

Article 2 (b) Management Rights clause in the

existing Collective Agreement reads as follows:

The Association and its members recognizeand acknowledge that, subject to the pro­visions thereto, it is the exclusivefunction of the Board to:

(i) maintain order, discipline andefficiency;

(ii) discharge, direct, classify, transfer,promote, demote, or suspend or other­wise discipline any member;

(iii) hire.

If a member claims that the Board has exercisedany of the functions outlined in paragraph (ii)in a discriminatory manner or without reasonablecause, then such a claim may be subject of agrievance under the provisions of the grievanceprocedure outlined in this Agreement or dealtwith under procedures within the exclusivejurisdiction of the Ontario Police Commission,as prescribed by the Police Act.

-6­

The Board Agrees that it will not exerciseany of the functions set out in this Articlein a manner inconsistent with the provisionsof this Agreement or the Police Act of Ontarioand the Regulations thereto.

Nothing in this Agreement shall be construedas imposing any personal liability upon anindividual who, from time to time, is a memberof the Board.

The Association has proposed that Article 2 (b) be

amended by inserting the words "or unfairly" in the last

para. It reads as follows:

If a member claims that the Board hasexercised any of the functions outlinedin paragraph (i), (ii) in a discrimina­tory manner, without reasonable cause,or unfairlY then such a claim may besubject of a grievance under the provisionsof the grievance procedure outlined inthis Agreement or dealt with under pro­cedures within the exclusive jurisdictionof the Ontario Police Commission, asprescribed by the Police Act.

Article 2 (b) in the civilian employees Collective

Agreement is identical to that of uniform officers Collective

Agreement. The Association's request for the above amend­

ment in Article 2 (b) is based on the fear that the Board

may not exercise management rights fairly and the Associa­

tion in that case would be left without proper remedy.

However, there is no evidence before me to show that the

-7­

Board has ever used the management rights clause unfairly.

Moreover, the expression "discriminatory manner or with­

out reasonable cause", in my opinion, provides an adequate

safeguard against any misuse of discretion in the exercise

of management functions. Therefore, I find no reason to

allow the change in Article 2 (b) as suggested by the

Association.

ISSUE NUMBER TWO

Hours of Work - Article 3

Article 3 in the existing Collective Agreement reads

as follows:

(a) The normal weekly per~od of duty whicha Civilian member of the Force is re­quired to perform shall be fjve (5)days duration and each daily tour shallconsist of eight (8) consecutive hours.A Civilian member of the Force who per­forms his duties in one period of eight(8) consecutive hours, shal] be allowedone (1) hour for lunch, to be taken atthe Police Station unless otherwiseauthorized.

(b) Days off in each week shall be consecutive,subject to the requirements of the Force.

(c ) The tours of duty for Civilian policepersonnel shall be consecutive and of one(1) week's duration, subject to the exigen­cies of the Force, as follows:

First tour - 11:30 p.m. to 7:JO a.m. Second tour 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Third tour 3:30 p.m. to 11:JO p.m.

-8­

provided that the Chief of Police shallhave the option to retain personnel ona steady day shift of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00p.m. or 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

The Association has requested that Article 3 be

amended to provide a four days' week and twelve hours a

d~. The relevant part of its proposal reads as follows:

The normal period of duty which a civilianmember is required to perform shall be offour days' duration, and each tour of dutyshall consist of twelve (12) consecutivehours, said hours to be from 0700 hours to1900 hours which will be the day shift,1900 hours to 0700 hours which will be thenight shift. The tours of duty shall consistof two day shiftsfollowed by two nightshifts. Each tour of duty shall be followedby four days off.

The issue hours of work for the civilian employees

is not directly related to the hours of work for the uniform

officers. However, it cannot be said that the hours of work

for the uniform officers have no bearing on the civilian

employees or vice versa. As I have referred the issue "hours

of work" for the uniform officers back to the parties to

resolve it within 90 days, it would be inappropriate for

me either to decide or express any opinion over this issue

at this time. Moreover, I hope that the parties at the same

time would be able to resolve the issue of "hours of work"

-9­

for the civilian employees as well. However, in case the

parties fail to reach a settlement over the hours of work

for the civilian employees, I retain the jurisdiction to

decide it.

ISSUE NUMBER THREE

Annual Vacation - Article 5

The Association has requested that Article 5 (c)

be amended to provide for three (J) weeks of vacation

after three (J) years instead of four (4) years of service.

Neither the arguments nor any other evidence presented by

the Association has enough persuasive force to indicate

that such a request be granted by this arbitrator. I ,

therefore, deny this request.

ISSUE NUMBER FOUR

Long Term Disability - Article 8 (c)

The Association has requested that the Board should

pay 100% instead of 90% of the cost of the premiums for the

benefits. The Association has proposed that the last para

of Article 8 (c) be amended to read:

The Board shall pay 100% of the costof the premiums for the benefit plansprovided under (b) and (c).

-10­

The Association argues that its proposal would

bring the Income Protection Plan into line with the

remainder of insurance plans contained in the contract,

all of which are 100% payment by the Board.

The Board, on the other hand, argues that its

contribution was already very generous. Further, it

would prefer to allocate its limited resource to salaries.

The Association has suggested that the total cost of this

request would be around $384.00 per year. This cost esti­

mate has not been disputed by the Board. I do not think

the Association's request is either out of line or un­

reasonable. I, therefore, allow this request and direct

that Article 8 (c) be accordingly amended.

ISSUE NUMBER FIVE

Insurance - Article 9 (a) (V)

The Association has requested that the Board should

have this policy upgraded to at least 1984 dental rates.

The Board,on the other hand, has offered to upgrade the

coverage to 1982 Ontario Dental Association's rate. Further,

the Board advised this arbitrator that very few area dentists

charge 1984 rates. In my opinion the offer of the Board

to upgrade the dental coverage to 1982 Ontario Dental

Association's rates is fair at least for the year 1985 and

I award so.

.

-11­

ISSUE NUMBER SIX

Salary Schedule - Article 13

In 1984, the salary rates for the civilian employees

were as follows:

Starting rate $16,068.00

After 12 months 16,481.00

After 24 months 17,320.00

After 36 months 17,823.00

The Association has requested a 10 per cent increase

over the 1984 salaries. Thus, the Association has proposed

the following salary schedule for 1985:

Starting rate $17,674.00

After 12 months 18,129.00

After 24 months 19,052.00

After 36 months 19,605.00

The Board, on the other hand, has offered a 4 per

cent increase over the 1984 salaries.

The Association justifies its claim of 10 per cent

salary increases for the civilian employees on the following

grounds:

-12­

1. The civilian employees are paid lower

than police officers. The civilians

should receive the same percentage in­

crease as do police officers. Even though

civilians would receive the same per­

centage increase, this would not be as

much money as police receive, simply

because of the lower wages.

2. In the last ten years, Innisfil Police

Force has undergone many changes. Changes

include moving to a new headquarters, a

new administration, updating of office equip­

ment and expansion of the police force

services. This has had a special effect

on the civilian clerk/dispatchers. Clerical

work has greatly increased and new administra­

tive procedures have generally increased

workload (with basically no increase in

civilian clerk/dispatchers) since civilians

started with the Force in 1973.

The Board has argued that the civilian employees

should not be granted same salary increases as the

uniform officers. However, I do not find any merit in

this argument.

-lJ-

It appears to me that over the years the parties

have negotiated the same salary increases both for the

uniform and civilian employees. Therefore, I do not see

any reason to disturb this well established relationship

between the salary increases of uniform offi"cersand

civilian employees. Thus, having regard to the presen­

tations of the parties, I award to the civilian employees

a 5.5 per cent (same as was awarded to the uniform officers)

increase over their 1984 salaries. This increase is con­

sistent with many of the negotiated and arbitral wage

rates for civilian employees of the police forces in

Ontario.

The Association has also demanded that the civilian

dispatchers be paid five hundred dollars a year for dispatching

calls to the Cookstown Fire Department and performing

certain special constable duties. In support of its re­

quest the Association has argued that "With the addition

of another municipality's fire department (Cookstown Fire

Department) our civilians are now responsible for dispatch

duties for this department~ The Board, in 1984, contracted

out to Cookstown to provide this service but provided no

extra compensation for this added work load to the civilians.

It is felt that some increase over and above that of a

percentage increase should be awarded".

-14­

The Board, on the other hand, has denied this request.

The Board has argued that dispatching of calls to Cookstown

Fire Department is an insignificant part of their workload.

According to the Board hardly 50 out of 10,000 calls a year

are directed to Cookstown Fire Department.

Th6 dispatching of calls to Cookstown has, indeed,

added some additional responsibility to the dispatchers

function. However, I am not persuaded that the workload

has increased to the extent that tt justifies an additional

remuneration. I, therefore, deny this request.

The Association has further requested that Article

13 (c) be amended to read as follows:

Any civilian employee performing thedual duty of relief dispatcher andstatistical duties shall receive a bonus pay amounting to nine hundred ($900) dollarsper annum in addition to pay received in schedule (a). Payments to be made quarterly in the amount of two hundred and twenty-five ($225) dollars.

In support of its request the Association has

stated that "In 1984 a civilian dispatcher was taken out

of full time dispatcher duties and required to do adminis­

trative clerical work and also fill in for full time dis­

patchers vacations. Although he performs supervisory-type

~

-15­

duties, the civilian assigned to this position,has never

been paid as such. It is felt'this civilian should be

paid a sum over and above that of a regular clerk/dis­

patcher in recognition of his extra duties and responsi­

bilities."

The parties in the 1984 Collective Agreement had

provided:

~tle 13 (c)

The Chief of Police at his discretionand if in his opinion a civilian memberhas shown exceptional performance and/orefficiency, may recommend that themember be reclassified before the com­pletion of periods of service shownin subsection (a) above.

Article 1J (c) in the existing Collective Agreement

had authorized the Chief of Police to recognize and recom­

mend reclassification of an individual, based on his per­

formance. It is obvious that no civilian employee was

reclassified during this period. This seems to have led

the Association to make this request.

It is evident from the submission of Mr. Jim Mason

that there has been a substantial increase in the duties

and responsibilities of the senior dispatcher. The Board

neither adduced any evidence to contradict this assertion

nor made any persuasive argument against this proposal.

-16­

Thus, having regard to the presentations of the parties

in this regard, I feel that a request for a new classi­

fication for a senior dispatcher is just and fair and I

award so. Accordingly, I order and direct that a new

classification for senior dispatcher be shown separately

in the Salary Schedule in Article 13 (a) with a salary

differential of nine hundred ($900.00) dollars. Further

that clause (c) be deleted from Article 13 of the Collective

Agreement.

ISSUE NUMBER SEVEN

Special Allowance - Article 14 (b)

The Association has requested an increase in travel­

ling and living allowance for attending the Police College

from $40.00 per week to $60.00 per week. The Association's

proposal reads:

Each civilian member attending theCollege shall receive a travellingand living allowance of sixty ($60)per week.

Even though one can appreciate the concerns of the

Association in making this request, it would appear that

neither the arguments nor any other evidence presented,

has enough persuasive force to indicate that such a request

be granted by this arbitrator. I, therefore, deny this

request.

,

-17­

ISSUE NUMBER EIGHT

Member's Personal File - Article 16 New

The Association has proposed a new Article to read

as follows:

(a) A member shall have the right to see thecontents of his personal file immediatelyupon request to the Chief of Police. Thecontents of a member's personal fileshall be governed by the following condi­tions:

( i) That the member be advised im­mediately of any documents orcomments that are to be placedin his/her file.

(ii) That all documents or commentsto the member's benefit be re­tained in the personal filefor as long as his/her file isin existence.

(iii) That any documents or commentsto the member's detriment beplaced in his/her file for amaximum of two years and thatwhen a member has had no fur­ther documents or comments ofa negative nature placed inhis/her file for the preceedingtwo (2) years, such detrimentaldocuments shall be removed fromthe member's file and destroyed.

This is an identical request as was proposed by the

Association for the uniform officers' Collective Agreement.

The Board has opposed this request on the ground that there

has been no demand or problem with any employee seeing his/

her file since Chief Pearson has been at the Innisfil Police

-18­

Force. In the alternative the Board has made the following

proposition:

... the Board submits that should there be a provision for requests for employees to see their own file, such a request should be in writing, and that the file should be observed in the company of the Chief of Police or his designate,that the file be observed within a reasonable period from, the date of request and subject to the exigenciesof the Force; that there be no sunset provision on the contents of a file, whether to the benefit or detriment of the employee. Also the weight to be given to the contents of the file should be decided by an arbitrator who can determine the importance of the information in light of the circumstance in which the cont~nts of the file are or would be considered.

In the uniform officer's award I said that" the

Association's proposal is interesting and deserves serious

consideration. However, I find that the Association's

proposal is one sided and cannot be allowed in its present

form. The language of the Board's proposal appears to me

more balanced, fair and reasonable. Therefore, I accept

the Association's idea and the Board's language for a new

clause on "Member's Personal File". I award the same pro­

vision to the civilian employees.

-19­

ISSUE NUMBER NINE

Uniformed Special Constable - Article 17 New

The Association has proposed that another article be

included in the civilian employees Agreement to include the

special constable/court officer. This Article should in­

.clude provisions for cleaning allowance as in Article 12

(b) of the Police Agreement, and a special salary section.

Proposed salary schedule should include salary increases

as in the police and civilians Agreements. The Association

has proposed the following salary schedule for this position:

Uniformed Special Constable Salary Schedule

Effective January 1, 1985

Time in Force Rate

1 to 6 months $17,000

6 to 12 months 17,750

12 to 24 months 19,000

24 to 36 months 20,250

36 months and over 22,000

The Special Constable would also be covered by all other

sections of the Civilian contract.

The Association has stated that "This is a new position

that was authorized by the Board of Commissioners of Police

in September 1984. At present there is one person performing

duties of a Uniform Special Constable. Since the position

-20­

was established and someone hired to fill it there has

never been anything outlining a pay scale or other

benefits for a uniformed special constable. Adding this

section to the contract would solve this problem."

According to the Board that the position in question

is not of a uniformed special constable but of a "community

services officer". Thus, he should be treated as other

civilian employees of the Force covered by the civilian

employees Collective Agreement.

The Association, in fact, has requested that a new

classification be created for this position. The Associa­

tion may have good reasons for requesting a separate classi­

fication for this position, but it failed to provide suf­

ficient evidence"to enable me to evaluate the job in

question. Thus, due to lack of relevant information such

as education, qualifications and training required as well

as the functions and duties performed on this job this

arbitrator is not in a position to determine whether or not

this job differs from that of the civilian employees.

Therefore, I deny this request. However, I suggest that

the parties should discuss this issue during the next

round of their negotiations.

-21­

CONCLUSION

I believe that I have dealt with all the outstanding

issues placed before me. The issue of "Hours of Work" has

been referred back to the parties to settle mutually. In

case the parties fail to resolve it I have specifically

retained the jurisdiction in this matter.

As the issue of "Hours of Work" is still unresolved,

the parties may not be able to conclude their 1985 Collective

Agreement immediately on the receipt of this award, there­

fore, I suggest that the salary increases be implemented

and retroactive salaries be paid to the employees within

three weeks from the date of this award.

Further, if I have through inadvertance failed to

make a specific finding on any of the requests presented

to me, or should any dispute arise between the parties as

to implementation of this award, I retain the jurisdiction

to make any such determinations. Either party may request

to reconvene these proceedings by written notice to me

within 90 days from the date of this award.

-22­

I wish to thank the representatives of the parties

for their able presentations, for the courtesy and assis­

tance they have extended to me.

Dated at Thunder Bay, Ontario, this 15th day of

October, 1985.

~il[~~)Arjun P. Aggarwal - Arbitrator