Comments:
[log in] or [register] to leave a comment for this document.
Go to: all documents
Looking inside:
Harmonization
(
display item 1)
[home] [about] [help] [policies] [legal disclaimer]
10-Feb-2012 [1020]
Part of Harmonization
Hi Glen,
I'm not sure, but I think that you're dealing with the harmonization problems for Ward 18? I've got a phone appointment with Councillor Bailao tomorrow afternoon, and I want to make sure that I've got the story right.
As far as I can see from looking at the rec part-time workers' harmonized job categories, there are a number of specifically place-based jobs, e.g. the curling club, the children's garden, Franklin the Turtle Garden on the island, and others. However there is no specific reference to the particular job requirements developed over some years at the four Ward 18 parks: Dufferin, Wallace, Campbell, and MacGregor.
In the case of Dufferin Grove, the recreation director first asked for job descriptions in 2006. He received the document, but made no response. It was updated in 2010, at Kelvin Seow's request: http://dufferinpark.ca/aboutus/wiki/wiki.php/DufferinGroveIsInTrouble.On-siteStaffWork. Kelvin said that he would pass it on to the harmonization lead, who I gather has now retired.
There is no evidence that these job descriptions were considered. Do you know what went wrong here, and how it can be fixed?
Thanks
Hi Jutta, Sorry for the delay but I have confirmed that the info for the DG job classifications was submitted. Unfortunately I don't know why the arbitrator did not include them in his decision. We have started the process of placing staff in their new job codes but are aware that there will be some codes specific to DG. We also have an opportunity to submit job profiles that were missed. I will review that aspect of the award with Sofia and use Mayssan's work to create a package to send back. Take care Glen
Thanks Glen. Did you mean that you plan to send a package to the job evaluation committee? If so, could you please send it to Dufferin Grove coordinators before you submit it? I'd like to have a look at it as well. That way any broken telephone can be avoided.
Also, could you forward me the original info package that the arbitrator ignored? It would be good to know what was in it.
Thanks again. You'll notice that I'm cc'ing the councillor on this because we've agreed to keep in touch about it.
Hi Jutta,
Yes. Any job's that were missed still have the potential to be acknowledged. I'll be happy to share it with the coordinators and yourself. Unfortunately I don't have the original package that was sent to the arbitrator. I was only able to confirm that the Dufferin Grove information was submitted along with all the other job descriptions.
Thanks Glen. I think the arbitrator's oversight needs more exploration, though. With whom did you confirm that the Dufferin Grove job descriptions went in? If we can find out the author of the Dufferin Grove job descriptions, we should be able to get a copy.
I hope you and your colleagues agree that there's an important issue here, that shouldn't just be swept under the rug. -- What happened, that the arbitrator ignored the Dufferin Grove item? Did s/he did give reasons, and if so, what were they?
Hi Glen,
I'm sure you're busy but I'd like to emphasize that this is an important issue for 'structure' as well as 'content' reasons -- will you be able to respond to my questions? Here they are again, numbered this time:
1. With whom did you confirm that the specific Dufferin Grove job descriptions went in to the arbitrator?
2. who was the author of these Dufferin Grove job descriptions?
3. if you can find out who wrote the descriptions, can you ask her/him for a copy?
4. Did the arbitrator give reasons for ignoring the submission, and if so, what were they?
Please let me know when you might be able to look for the answers.
Hi Sue and Glen,
-- to recap my recollection of our chat yesterday as it touched on harmonization, Sue --- you asked how I know the details of the harmonized job descriptions -- I'm guessing that somebody took it off the CUPE 79 website. It's public information, yes?
As for my questions to Glen below -- if I understood you right, Sue, you suggested that I wait until Glen/Sofia have let the PT Ward 18 staff know their new/revised categories. Presumably because after that Glen won't be as busy?
I can wait for a couple of weeks, but the process seems flawed, and the jobs that staff do are directly related to what communities want from their public amenities. I hope you agree that for that reason, it's important to know what went wrong and why, and how to fix it.
next display
|
|
(showing first display)
|