Tasking Current Policies and Practices

Public Works operations typically carry out a fairly broad set of tasks throughout the year. These tasks can range between highly skilled assignments, where considerable training and skills are required, to basic labouring chores where few skills are required and the work can be physically unpleasant to do, especially during bad weather. It is common for management to establish some sort of Tasking System within their operation to make sure that properly trained staff is available to do the work and also to find a way of sharing the unpleasant chores fairly within the group. In unionized workplaces, seniority is commonly a primary consideration when assigning staff to their daily duties.

The current Seniority Based Tasking System has been designed to address two concerns that existed within the division. Firstly, there had been accusations levelled toward management that the delegation of work was subject to favouritism. The implication was that some employees were given preferred assignments while others were given the less preferred depending on whether or not they held the favour of management. Secondly, since many of the staff within the division are approaching retirement, management identified a need to provide for succession

The system is designed to give staff an opportunity to select areas where they prefer to work and to give management an opportunity, through on the job experience and training, to expand the numbers of staff who could do particular types of work. The system also requires management to select staff from predetermined lists to avoid any implication of favouritism. The system works as follows. The available jobs are posted annually each February and, by seniority, staff is slotted into their preferred positions for the summer season. Some positions are directly assigned by management because of the skill specialty required, and the remaining unassigned staff, are used to fill vacancies or, to be assigned as needed.

The previous tasking system based work assignments on an individuals job class, skill and ability This system generated 20 to 30 grievances a year from staff who did not like the assignment they were given. Although the ability to assign work is within the scope of the Management Rights clause of the collective agreement, the grievances were heard by management in the interest of good labour management relations.

To introduce the new seniority based tasking system, two administrative changes were necessary for it to work. Firstly, the pay schedule had to be amended to recognize that as the workers learned more, they were worth more and, secondly, everyone had to be equally qualified to do the required work. In theory, staff would be sent to work on the crews they preferred and all would work out. One Foreman has the responsibility to make up the daily assignment sheet based on what has been scheduled and what staff resources are available on any given day.

Recognizing that the seniority based tasking system was a departure from the previous system and neither management nor the union were confident that it would be successful; the system was introduced as a temporary measure to evaluate whether or not it would be effective in addressing the initial concerns. The tasking system was put into place through a memorandum of understanding attached to the collective agreement.

Supervisors and Foremen voiced the following concerns: • Training has lagged behind

• Workers have advanced in pay levels on the basis of years of service and not on the basis of skill acquisition

• High absenteeism has resulted in more juggling of staff

• Under-experienced senior staff are doing work that others, and sometimes junior staff, do better

• Impact of garbage collection staff’s absenteeism has made the system more difficult to apply

• The seniority Tasking System occupies too much management time and effort, and • There is too much pressure on the foreman who has to juggle the daily assignments

while trying to fill in for the absenteeism and not violate the seniority list

The implementation of the Seniority Tasking System has resulted in fewer union grievances. The Union executive’s view is, however, that the lack of grievances is due to their intervention to suppress the grievances.

Subject to the integration of other recommendations in this study, the City should reconsider the practice of tasking by seniority. The primary consideration in assigning work should never vary from seeking to provide the most efficient and effective service delivery possible. It is management’s obligation to consider the public needs as a priority over staff’s personal preference. The Management rights clause in the Collective Bargaining Agreement provides management with the right to assign and schedule work as required by Council policy and any relevant standards documents or legislated requirements. Seniority is also no guarantee of skill ability or diligence regardless of the amount of training provided. Management may seek to identify other tasking systems where worker seniority can play a role in the selection process. One such tasking system identifies core teams of workers who are selected to those teams based on skill ability and seniority, in that order. The selection to those teams is approved by management for a long period of time. Our discussions with staff indicate they are aware of some of these alternatives. Rather than offer specific recommendations for an alternative, the best solution will be one made in Peterborough by Peterborough’s staff.

6.5.1 Recommendation - Tasking

That the City of Peterborough discontinue it’s tasking system which considers seniority as the primary means of assignment. A preferred alternative would be one that considers skills as the primary mechanism for task assignment, followed by seniority. To ensure the efficient and effective delivery of service and to improve continuity of service, task assignment should also be for longer periods of time.