Part XVI: Letters of Understanding
| #1 RE: SOCIETY-MANAGEMENT FUNCTION/ESR BOUNDARY ISSUES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Intent | ||
| This LOU seeks to clarify employee rights during the operation of Article 64 related to positions at or near to the boundary between the Society and Management Function and provide an equitable means for employees to participate in competitions or a mix and match and follow their work where it has been transferred in or out of the Society's jurisdiction as a result of a reorganization. It is not intended to provide enhanced employment continuity rights in comparison to employees whose work has not changed jurisdiction. | ||
| The Problem | ||
| 1 | Position X is in the old organization and is in the Society. The duties change very little in the new organization but the change is sufficient to alter the jurisdiction of the position (e.g., the span of supervision and control is expanded and there will be more Society direct reports). | |
| Under the current rules the Society-represented employees currently in position X will not be permitted to compete for the position in the new organization during a mix and match. | ||
| 2 | There is a converse of 1. Position Y is currently excluded from the Society (i.e., MF or ESR). In the new organization the position is substantially the same but the jurisdiction of the job will move to the Society's jurisdiction. Once again, the change is minimal (e.g., there is reduced supervision and fewer or no Society direct reports). | |
| 3 | Position Z is being formed in the new organization. It appears that it will be excluded/included but there is uncertainty about some factors (e.g., the number of direct reports). Therefore, the jurisdiction is uncertain and may eventually change. | |
| In this case, Management could make an arbitrary designation as excluded and the Society could challenge the designation later. If Management were to do this, then the Society-represented employees would not be able to compete for the position during a mix and match process. If the ultimate jurisdiction was within the Society, it could be that the selection process would have to be repeated. | ||
| If Management were to designate the position as included in the Society then MF and ESR would be excluded from a mix and match process. A similar result could occur, if the jurisdiction were to subsequently change. | ||
| The Solution | ||
| A joint process for identifying positions X, Y and Z will be established as follows: | ||
| 1 | Management will identify the X, Y and Z positions and identify the employees who could be adversely affected. The Society will have approval/veto rights. (Note: This is intended to ensure X, Y and Z positions are legitimate and not intended to increase the opportunities for MF and ESR employees or reduce the opportunities for Society represented employees to exercise their seniority rights in the mix and match process.) | |
| 2 | Category X - These positions will be filled in the MF mix and match or advertised Hydro One-wide using the normal vacancy process if not filled in the mix and match. Society represented employees identified under paragraph 1 will be treated equally to MF employees during a mix and match but may only be selected for Position X. If the position is advertised Hydro One-wide then the employee will be treated preferentially (i.e., be granted the same priority as surplus MF or ESR) for the specified position only. If the employee is not selected, then the employee can exercise all of his/her normal rights under Article 64. Where the employee is not selected for the position, the Society and the employee will be advised of the selection criteria and provided with reasons for non selection. | |
| 3 | Category Y - These positions will be filled in the Society mix and match or advertised Hydro One-wide using the normal vacancy process if not filled in the mix and match. MF or ESR employees identified under paragraph 1 will be treated equally to Society employees during a mix and match but can only be selected providing they meet the senior qualified criteria for Position Y (i.e., such employees cannot be placed in any other position or displace Society-represented employees). If the position is advertised Hydro One-wide, then the employee will be treated preferentially (i.e., be granted the same priority as surplus Society) for the specified Y position only. If the employee is not selected, then the employee will be treated similarly to other MF/ESR staff in all other respects and have no additional rights. | |
| 4 | Category Z - The parties will attempt to reach consensus on the jurisdiction of the position based on all available information (which will include an organization chart showing reporting relationships, selection criteria, and description of duties) prior to the selection process. Where consensus is not reached, Management will determine the jurisdiction and the Society will have the right to grieve. | |
| 5 | The rights of the Society to grieve the jurisdiction of positions are unaffected by agreements reached under this process. | |
| 6 | This Letter of Understanding expires March 31, 2005. | |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and Keith Rattai for the Society, January 2003) | ||
| #2 RE: EXPEDITING REDEPLOYMENT GRIEVANCES AND ARBITRATIONS | ||
| The undersigned Parties agree as follows: | ||
| Complaint and Grievance Procedure | ||
| 1. | This agreement applies to grievances arising from the administration of Employment Continuity provisions of the Collective Agreement (Article 64.1.2), including the redeployment process in each Unit of Application, non-selection to positions in the mix and match and non-selection of employees entitled to priority placement in the search/notice period, and to decisions of JROTs. | |
| 2. | Except as specified in this agreement, all provisions and practices established in relation to the Complaint and/Grievance/Arbitration Procedure apply to these grievances. | |
| 3. | An employee's complaint must be submitted no later than 20 working days after completion of the Mix and Match, e.g. final approval of the JRPT Second Report or equivalent, the JROT decision, or the selection process that includes the decision he or she feels is unfair. | |
| 4. | At Step 1 of the grievance procedure, the Society will submit complaints within the scope of this agreement to the relevant JRPT, JROT, and/or line management through Labour Relations Strategy Division. Management and The Society will be given 10 working days to attempt to resolve the grievance. The Society's position on the grievance is not prejudiced by that of Society members of JRPTs or JROTs. | |
| 5. | Failing resolution at Step 1, The Society may advance the grievance to Step 2 of the grievance procedure within a further 10 working days. | |
| 6. | The Parties will appoint regular and backup members to at least one Standing Redeployment Grievance Team, which will act as a Second Step Grievance Committee according to the terms of the Collective Agreement. The Committee will meet within ten days of a grievance being filed to attempt to resolve the grievance. | |
| 7 | Failing resolution at Step 2, The Society may refer the grievance to arbitration within 20 working days. The Parties will designate and retain one arbitrator for grievances under this agreement. | |
| Arbitration | ||
| 8. | The parties will review case by case the appropriateness of the following expedited arbitration process for grievances arising from the Expedited Redeployment Grievance process. | |
| 9. | Mr. Joseph W. Samuels, or another arbitrator acceptable to the parties, will be retained as arbitrator for Employment Continuity grievances and he will be asked to deal with agreed-upon cases according to the terms of point 10, below. The arbitrator shall control the proceedings and retain jurisdiction to require further submissions of fact or argument as he deems necessary to determine the matter. | |
| 10. | The expedited arbitration process will require the following:
| |
| 11. | Where the parties do not agree that a case is appropriate for this procedure, it will be dealt with by the same arbitrator as a conventional referral to arbitration. | |
| (signed by B.R. Story and M. Germani - June 13, 1995) | ||
| #3 RE: FIRST LINE MANAGEMENT SUPERVISORY POSITIONS (TMS) | ||
| The parties agree to maintain commitments with respect to the jurisdiction of First Line Management Supervisory positions (TMS) as set out in the following Letters of Understanding, which are in other respects terminated as complete: | ||
| a. | Implementation of the Retail Systems Agreement (August 16, 1995); | |
| b. | The Implementation of the Grid System Agreement on TMS (January 30, 1996); | |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and John Cameron for the Society, March 2001). | ||
| #4 RE: ALLOCATION OF SOCIETY STAFF TO ONTARIO HYDRO SUCCESSOR COMPANIES | ||
| All employees of Ontario Hydro on payroll at December 2, 1998 were allocated to the successor companies/bargaining units: OPGI Non-Nuclear, OPGI Nuclear, OHSC, IMO, ESA. | ||
| In certain cases, one successor company/bargaining unit ("service provider") continued to provide a service to one or more successor companies/bargaining units ("service recipient"), after the de-merger of Ontario Hydro (April 1, 1999). In these situations, management determined the number of FTEs required to provide the service, in consultation with the Society. | ||
| The employees allocated to positions providing the service shall be subject to the following: | ||
| 1. | If the service arrangement is later terminated, a number of employees equivalent to the number of FTEs identified above shall be allocated to the service recipient on the basis of seniority and preference, subject to work unit viability and reasonableness as in paragraph 2 above. | |
| 2. | An employee who does not wish to resign employment with the service provider may remain with the company/bargaining unit subject to applicable redeployment provisions of the Society's Collective Agreement with that company/bargaining unit. | |
| 3. | An employee who is offered a position under this subsection shall be entitled, as an employee of the service recipient, to relocation assistance on such terms as it exists in the collective agreement that applies to the receiving organization at the time of reallocation under this section. | |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and John Cameron for the Society, March 2001). | ||
| #5 RECLASSIFICATION OF 40-HOUR FLM JOBS THAT PRIMARILY SUPERVISE NON-TRADES | ||
| Without prejudice and without creating a precedent regarding any other matter, the undersigned parties agree as follows: | ||
| 1. | This Letter of Understanding is intended to address, on an interim basis1, the problem of appropriately evaluating First Line Manager (FLM) jobs with regularly scheduled hours of work of forty hours per week that exclusively or primarily2 manage3 non-tradespersons4 under the Trades Management Supervisor (TMS) job evaluation plan. | |
| 2. | This agreement applies to incumbents in the Customer Service FLM, the Distribution FLM - Remote Communities Shift Manager jobs and FLM - Field Technical Services ("included jobs"). The incumbents in these jobs as of the date of signing of this agreement are listed in Appendix A. The Society and Hydro One may mutually agree to extend the application of this Letter of Understanding to other jobs consistent with the intent expressed in paragraph 1. | |
| 3. | The included jobs will be reclassified MP4 and paid off of salary schedule 01 effective the date of signing of this Letter of Understanding. While these jobs remain on salary schedule 01, incumbents will have all rights under Plan A until such time as the parties have agreed on a replacement job evaluation plan. | |
| 4. | Employees shall be given "point to point" (i.e., as if placed at the same performance standing at the MP4 salary grade) retroactive compensation for the period they were incumbents in the jobs listed in paragraph 2 between January 1, 1999 and the date of signing of the Letter of Understanding. | |
| 5. | The regularly scheduled hours of work per week for incumbents in included jobs shall be 40 hours.5 For the purposes of these jobs only, salary schedule 01 applies to 40 hours per week. As a result, regularly scheduled hours between 35 and 40 hours per week will not be paid on a pro-rated basis. | |
| 6. | Management shall expeditiously produce job documents for included jobs reflecting the changes agreed to in this Letter of Understanding. These documents shall provide management with the flexibility to assign incumbents to supervise different employee classifications (e.g., trades, clerical-technical, operators) as required. This provision is without prejudice to whether or not this reassignment creates an "adverse impact" within the meaning of Article 64 of the Collective Agreement. | |
| 7. | Except as expressly modified by this Letter of Understanding, all provisions of the Collective Agreement shall continue to be applicable. | |
| 8. | This Letter of Understanding shall remain in effect until the earlier of when the parties reach agreement of a new job evaluation plan (pursuant to Section 30.5 of the Collective Agreement) or December 31, 2000. If no agreement on a new job evaluation plan is reached by December 31, 2000, this Letter of Understanding shall continue in effect thereafter subject to termination by either party on 90 days' written notice. | |
| 1 | "Interim" means until agreement is reached on a new job evaluation plan pursuant to Section 30.5 of the Collective Agreement. | |
| 2 | "Primarily" means that normally more than 50% of time is spent managing non-tradespersons. | |
| 3 | In this Letter of Understanding, "manage" is used in the context of the continuation of the jurisdictional commitments given in LOU #3. | |
| 4 | "Tradespersons" means those recognized as such under the PWU-Hydro One Collective Agreement. | |
| 5 | For the sake of clarity, Article 69 of the Collective Agreement ("Reduced Base Hours - 40 Hour Workers) applies to incumbents in these jobs. | |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and John Wilson for the Society, July 14, 1999). | ||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6. | Joint Health and Safety Committee members and the Union Representatives shall have the right to review the management approved corrective action plan, except as noted in item 2 above. | |
| 7. | There will be a discussion between the parties prior to the release of a final report, by either party, that is not described in item 2 above. | |
| 8. |
Either party may cancel this Letter of Understanding on 60 days notice.
(Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and Keith Rattai for the Society, April 18, 2005) | |
| #14 RE: career bridge | |
|---|---|
| Career Bridge is a non profit organization which connects internationally qualified (foreign trained) Professionals with employers to gain Canadian work experience to help the individual succeed in today's market place. | |
|
Society represented employees may be utilized to mentor, train and to oversee training related assignments of Career Bridge particpants. It is expected that any investment of time by Society represented employees in training and mentoring will be offset by the contributions of Career Bridge participants. Hydro One and the Society support the goal of the Career Bridge program. To assist with its objectives, the parties agree to the following: | |
| 1. | Internship lengths are of at least 4 months and can be extended to a maximum of 12 months at the discretion of Hydro One. |
| 2. | Hydro One will advise the Society Office of each potential Career Bridge opportunity that is within the Society's jurisdiction prior to finalizing an agreement with Career Bridge. |
| 3. | Career Bridge particpants will not become employees of Hydro One. |
| 4. | Career Bridge is the legal employer of the participants so all payroll administration and associated liabilities reside with Career Bridge. |
| 5. | In order to make the internship as beneficial as possible, participants may be assigned training excercises consisting of work within the Society's jurisdiction. |
| 6. | Participants will not be represented by the Society. |
| 7. | There will be no adverse impact within the meaning of Articles 64 and/or 18 on a Society represented employee or the Society, including no reduction in Society represented positions (and associated hiring requirements) nor any displacement of Society represented employees from their positions, as a resuly of the Career Bridge program. |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and Keith Rattai for the Society, February 28, 2006). | |
| #15 RE: eXCLUSIONS PROCESS | |
|---|---|
| The following shall constitute full and final settlement of the issue of which newly-excluded MCP jobs must be processed through the exclusion process outlined in the collective agreement. | |
|
The following agreement only addresses situations where the newly-excluded MCP job is excluded under the new exclusion criterion (See Appendix III). It does not alter the practice associated with the other exclusion criteria, nor does it apply to jobs that have a MCP position reporting to them. | |
| 1. | Vice-President jobs and/or jobs rated Band 4 or above do not need to go through the exclusion process. Hydro One will notify the Society about any applicable new jobs. |
| 2. | Jobs rated Band 5 (without a MCP report), Band 6 (without a MCP report), Band 7 and below will be processed according to Article 2.5 of the collective agreement. |
| 3. | The Director, Aboriginal Relations will be deemed to have been through the process. Hydro One will send the Society an overview of the job. If the Society has any issues with this job, the parties will meet to discuss. The Society has the right to challenge this exclusion through the grievance-arbitration process. |
| In the event that Hydro One changes the system used to classify MCP jobs, or significantly alters the MCP band structure, the parties will attempt to reach agreement on how to apply the principles of this agreement to the new/modified classification system. Failing agreement, either party may refer this dispute to mediator-arbitrator Kevin Whitaker or a mutually agreeable alternate. | |
| (Signed by Steve Strome for Hydro One and Keith Rattai for the Society, March 20, 2008). | |
