IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER SUBSECTION 124(3) OF THE POLICE SERVICES ACT

Transcription

1 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER SUBSECTION 124(3) OF THE POLICE SERVICES ACT BETWEEN: THE HAMILTON POLICE SERVICES BOARD (Hereinafter called the Board ) AND THE HAMILTON POLICE ASSOCIATION ( Hereinafter called the Association ) AND IN THE MATTER OF GRIEVANCE NO. 025/06 - PART-TIME EMPLOYEES JANICE JOHNSTON - SOLE ARBITRATOR APPEARANCES: For the Employer: Gary J. Kuzyk Counsel Rosemary Auld For the Grievor: Brad Boyce Administrator, Hamilton Police association Angie Acciaccaferro Donna Popovich Hearings in this matter took place on: August 20, October 18 and November 13, 2007; January 29, April 7, 8, 24, 2008; and May 29 and September 19, AWARD

2 1 On June 11, 2007, I was appointed arbitrator pursuant to Subsection 124(3) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O c P.15, as amended, to hear and determine a rights dispute, between the Hamilton Police Association and the City of Hamilton Police Services Board with respect to GRV-025/06 Civilian Scheduling - Part-time Members. On the first day scheduled to hear this matter, we attempted to mediate the case but were unsuccessful. At the next scheduled hearing day in this matter, the parties filed with me an Agreed Statement of Facts which reads as follows: AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. The parties agree that there are no jurisdictional disputes or preliminary issues that need to be addressed. 2. The parties agree that the provisions in Schedule "E" that show the date "(1995)" at the end of the paragraph have been in the Collective Agreement since Any changes to such provisions since 1995 have been cosmetic in nature, made only due to an organizational name change. 3. The parties agree that the 1995 provisions in Schedule "E" were new provisions. At the time they were negotiated, all part-time members were being treated as ad hoc employees for the purposes of shift assignments, and the parties did not contemplate the introduction of advance scheduling for part-time employees. The parties agreed to advance scheduling for part-time members in late 2003, in conjunction with the settlement of Grievance #GRV-058/03, by which the Employer agreed to pay part-time members for public holidays pursuant to the Employment Standards Act, The parties acknowledge that there have been 4 sets of negotiations since the 1995 agreement (being , , and ). 5. The parties agree that the Employer identified problems virtually from the introduction of the new scheduling system, but the parties did not immediately address the problems pending assessment of scheduling issues by the Employer's Wellness Committee. The Employer's scheduling difficulties gradually became more acute over time. By early 2005 the Employer was finding the situation sufficiently problematic that it initiated efforts to negotiate a mutually acceptable policy. Discussions between the parties took place periodically, but by the end of 2005 and into early 2006 the negotiations were reaching a stalemate. The Employer ultimately developed a policy that it presented to the Association in early June of 2006.

3 2 6. The Employer sought to implement its June, 2006 policy effective on January 1, 2007, but eventually refrained from fully enforcing it, due to the fact that the arbitration was pending. Another joint committee was established in 2007, to negotiate the part-time scheduling policy. The parties were not successful in agreeing upon a policy. As referred to in the Minutes of Settlement the relevant language in the collective agreement includes Schedule E to the collective agreement and it provides: SCHEDULE E PART-TIME & TEMPORARY FULL-TIME MEMBERS Collective agreement articles 1. It is agreed that only the provisions in this Schedule shall apply to part-time and temporary full-time members as defined in Articles 1.3 and 1.4 of the Collective Agreement.... Hours of Work 3. The standard hours of work for part-time and temporary full-time members shall be as required but shall conform with the scheduling provisions of Article 3 when a part-time and/or a temporary full-time member is used to replace a full-time member for the entire shift (1995).... Scheduling/Filling of Vacancies 15. Part-time and temporary full-time members shall fill vacancies according to the following process: (a) A list will be constructed by the Hamilton [2002] Police Service consisting of members who have been determined by the Service to be suitable and qualified for such employment. (b) The aforementioned list of part-time and temporary full-time personnel will be divided into the following sections: Section A Members qualified to work in the Communications Department, including switchboard. Section B Members qualified to perform Special Constable duties in the Court security. Section C Members qualified to perform Special Constable duties at P.S.O. and Custody. Section D Members qualified to perform as a Special Project Monitor, as set out in

4 3 Article 1.4(c) Section E Members qualified for general clerical duties. The identification of the aforementioned sections does not limit the Board s right to establish new part-time and/or temporary full-time sections. (1995) 16. The Human Resources Department, or delegate, shall maintain a departmental seniority list for scheduling purposes. Calculation of seniority will be based on hours worked with the Organization and not the department/section. (1995) 17. The initial construction of this seniority list shall be based upon seniority with the most senior member appearing as the first member on the list and the least senior member appearing as the last member. (1995) 18. (a) The selection process for temporary full-time assignments will be on a rotational basis within the section assigned. (b) The selection process for part-time assignments will take place on a rotational basis to the extent possible with the understanding that the aim of the parties is to achieve an equitable division of work. (c) Selection will commence with the first person on the sectional seniority list and will progress in order down the list. (d) Subject to paragraph (b), selection will not deviate from this consecutive selection process unless the position to be filled requires a specific skill or ability which is not held by the next member in the rotation. In that event, the next member on the list with the required skill will be selected. (e) The selection process for the subsequent assignment will commence with the member who would have been selected for the prior position had a specific skill or ability not been required. (f) If a member offered a position refuses the position, that position will be offered to the next member on the list. The reason for the refusal will be documented. (g) The member refusing the position will not be offered the next available position but must await their turn after the entire rotation is completed and recommence from the start of the list. (1995) 19. (a) The length of positions offered to fill vacancies will be for a maximum of no greater than three (3) months. (b) If it appears that a leave will be longer than three (3) months, it will be split into three (3) month periods. (c) If it is not possible to have all the periods consist of three (3) months because of the length of the total leave, the vacancy will be divided into as many three (3) month periods as possible, with the

5 4 last period being comprised of the remainder. (d) It is to be noted that no member has the right to fill a three (3) month vacancy. (e) Where a vacancy offered is less than three (3) months, that will be considered to be the total position offered and the next person on the rotation will be in line for the next vacancy. (1995) 20. Exceptions to the aforementioned filling of vacancies will be where it is determined by Management that it is in the best interest of the Service to have one (1) member fill a long term vacancy for the efficient and effective delivery of the Service. (1995) 21. Part-time and temporary full-time members may apply for full-time vacancies based upon internal postings provided the member is on the part-time/temporary full-time list. (1995) The other relevant articles in the collective agreement are: Article 1 Scope 1.1 The Provisions of this agreement apply to all members employed in the job classifications set forth in Schedule A attached hereto and forming part of this Agreement and for the purpose of clarity, the rates of pay and the hourly rates set forth in the said Schedule A in respect of the job classifications described therein apply, during the term of this Agreement to all members employed in the said classifications. As per subsection 118 (1) of the Police Services Act the parties assign the civilian members to this separate collective agreement. [2003] A part-time member is defined as a member who regularly works less than 104 hours per month. A part-time member may exceed 104 hours per month where an emergency unscheduled situation arises and all other means have been exhausted in an effort to eliminate a staffing shortage. It is agreed that the provisions of Schedule E appended hereto will be the only provisions of this Collective Agreement that apply to part-time members as defined herein. (1995) Article 2 Management Rights 2.1 (a) The Association and its members recognize and acknowledge that it is the exclusive function of the Hamilton Police Services Board [2002]: (i) to direct the working force which the right to direct, plan and control working operations and to schedule working hours, and (ii) to hire, classify, transfer, promote, demote, dismiss, discipline, suspend,

6 5 or lay off members because of lack of work or other legitimate reason, and (iii) to introduce new and improved facilities and methods to improve the efficiency of the operations of the Service (g) The Board agrees that it will not exercise any of the functions set out in this Article in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement or the Police Services Act of Ontario and the Regulations thereto (k) Management recognizes and accepts the provisions of this Agreement as binding upon itself and upon each of its Members and pledges that it and each of its Members will observe the provisions of this Agreement. The other provisions in the collective agreement referred to by the parties in final argument are found in a letter of understanding pertaining to regularly scheduled part time employees. I have attached a copy of this letter of understanding to this award as Appendix A. As noted in the agreed statement of facts, the grievance in this case challenges the new civilian part-time scheduling policy put in place by the employer in Although the parties were able to agree to a large extent on the contents of the new policy there remained one crucial aspect of it which was in dispute. As it is a lengthy document rather than set the entire policy out in this decision I have attached it as Appendix B. The provision in dispute is found under the heading procedure and reads as follows:... part-time members shall not have the right to refuse scheduled work or to make themselves unavailable to be scheduled for work except for emergent situations (i.e. personal illness, injury or medical emergency.) The dispute between the parties comes down to whether the Board, pursuant to the collective agreement, has the right to put in place a policy that stipulates that parttime employees shall not have the right to refuse work which is scheduled in advance or to make themselves unavailable to work except in emergencies. In developing this policy the Board relies upon the managements rights clause and the language which is found in Schedule E to the collective agreement under the heading Scheduling/Filling of

7 6 Vacancies. The Association agrees that the disputed language in the collective agreement is found in Schedule E under the heading Scheduling/Filling of Vacancies but do not accept the Board s interpretation of this language as giving them the right to develop and implement the policy language set out above. The provisions in dispute are found in Schedule E section 18 (f) and (g): (f) If a member offered a position refuses the position, that position will be offered to the next member on the list. The reason for the refusal will be documented. (g) The member refusing the position will not be offered the next available position but must wait their turn after the entire rotation is completed and recommence from the start of the list. (1995) The Association and the Board disagree on the meaning to be given to the word position found in (f) and (g) set out above. It is the view of the Association that the word position should be read in the context in which it is used. That is, to describe a vacancy, a work assignment or a job and that the word position also includes the scheduling of an individual shift. It was suggested that the procedure set out in section 18 is the process followed for the scheduling of individual shifts as well as the filling of various types of vacancies. The Association argues that pursuant to this language their members have the right to refuse shift assignments and that the Board cannot put into place a scheduling policy that takes away this right. The Association suggested that Section 18 (f) and (g) are clear on their face and that the word position means vacancy, assignment, job and shift. In the alternative, it was suggested that if I am of the view that the word position is not clear on its face, then I should read it in the context in which it has been used and consider the evidence concerning past practice. The Board stated that Section 18 (f) and (g) were clear on their face and that the word position should not be read as including the word shift. The Board argues that section (f) and (g) are to be read in conjunction with the provisions preceding them and that they apply to the filling of vacancies, jobs and assignments not shift scheduling. In

8 7 the alternative the Board suggested that should I find the word to be ambiguous, then I should consider the evidence presented by the parties regarding past practice and in particular the events which took place from 2003 onwards. The agreed facts set out at the beginning of this award provide some background to this case. In accordance with them, the following facts are accepted by the parties. I would note that I did not hear any evidence of bargaining history or the intentions of the parties at the time that Schedule E was negotiated. Schedule E became part of the collective agreement in 1995 and applies to parttime and temporary full-time members. At the time the language was negotiated all parttime members were being treated as ad hoc employees for the purposes of shift assignments and the parties did not contemplate the introduction of advance scheduling for part-time employees. Although it is not included in the agreed facts, it was not disputed that when the parties used the term ad hoc to describe the status of part-time members prior to 2003, they were referring to an employee who had the right to elect to work or not when requested to do so. It was also not disputed that the majority of the scheduling of part-timers is done on a last minute basis. In late 2003, the parties agreed to advance scheduling for part-time members in conjunction with the settlement of Grievance #GRV-058/03, by which the Employer agreed to pay part-time members for public holidays pursuant to the Employment Standards Act, The employer developed a new scheduling system and although the Board identified problems virtually from the introduction of the new system, the parties did not immediately address the problems as it was referred to a Committee. The Employer's scheduling difficulties gradually became more acute over time. By early 2005 the Employer was finding the situation sufficiently problematic that it initiated efforts to negotiate a mutually acceptable policy. Discussions between the parties took place periodically, but by the end of 2005 and into early 2006 the negotiations were reaching a stalemate. The Employer ultimately developed a policy that it presented to

9 8 the Association in early June of The Employer sought to implement its June, 2006 policy effective on January 1, 2007, but eventually refrained from fully enforcing it due to the fact that the arbitration was pending. Another joint committee was established in 2007, to negotiate the part-time scheduling policy. The parties were not successful in agreeing upon a policy. My task is to interpret Schedule E and the language dealing with the Scheduling/Filing of vacancies. The object of this interpretive exercize is to determine the intention of the parties and if possible to do so, provide an interpretation which is based on the actual words which the parties have chosen to use in the collective agreement. In determining the intention of the parties it is assumed that the parties meant what they said. It is my role to give the language used by the parties a meaning that it can reasonably bear and that is internally consistent. To assist in interpreting collective agreements arbitrators have accepted and applied various rules of construction or interpretive principles. The parties referred to these in their final submissions. In considering the terms of the collective agreement that are in dispute, I must first determine whether the language is ambiguous on its face so as to permit the admission of extrinsic evidence, such as past practice, as an aid to interpretation. It is generally accepted and was not disputed by the parties in this case, that extrinsic evidence is not admissible unless I conclude that the language in issue is ambiguous. Simply because the parties disagree as to the meaning of the language in dispute does not make it ambiguous. In DHL Express (Canada) Ltd. and C.A.W. Locals 4215, 144 & 4278 (2004) 124 L.A.C. (4 th ) 271 (the DHL Express Case ), the arbitrator reviewed some of the often applied rules of construction and approaches taken by arbitrators when faced with the task of interpreting language in a collective agreement. I will set out his analysis in more detail later in this award, but at this point

10 9 what is helpful is to review his comments on approaches to be utilized in determining whether language is or is not ambiguous on its face. I would like to start with a quote he set out from Re International Nickel Co. of Canada Ltd. and U.S.W. (1974), 5 L.A.C. (2d) 331 (Weatherill) at pp and note his comments after that: It may be that the provisions of the collective agreement here in issue pose a problem of construction, so that they may be said to be of doubtful meaning in that very general sense. In our view, however, the interpretation of the notion of latent ambiguity to include generally all cases of doubtful meaning or application... should not be and never was intended to be taken so far as to open the door to the admission of extrinsic evidence wherever a disagreement as to the construction of a document arises. If that were allowed, the strength of a document such as a collective agreement would be greatly reduced, and the well-established rules respecting the admission of extrinsic evidence would be meaningless. It is well accepted that arguability as to [different] construction(s), standing alone, does not create an ambiguity, allowing the introduction of extrinsic evidence (in Re Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Telecommunications Union (1975), 8 L.A.C. (2d) 256 (H.D. Brown) at p 259). When ascertaining the common intention of the parties objective tests must be used and not to what the parties, post contractu, may wish to say was their intent, albeit with honesty and sincerity (Re Puretex Knitting Co. and C.T.C.U., Loc 560 (1975), 8 L.A.C. (2d) 371 (Dunn) at p I agree with the articulation of the jurisprudence set out above and in particular Arbitrator Hamilton s conclusion that simply because the parties disagree on the meaning to be given to particular collective agreement language does not make it ambiguous. After carefully considering the language used by the parties in Schedule E, section 18 and in particular section 18 (f) and (g) I conclude that the word position is not ambiguous and I will not therefore utilize the evidence of past practice as an aid to interpretation.

11 10 The parties were in agreement that in interpreting section 18 and in particular the word position, that I should utilize several canons or rules of construction. In the DHL Express Case, referred to on the previous page, the arbitrator reviewed some of the often applied rules of construction and approaches taken by arbitrators when faced with the task of interpreting language in a collective agreement. He stated: Some preliminary remarks on the basic rules which govern my interpretive task are in order. The predominant reference point for an arbitrator must be the language in the Agreement (here, the Minimum Payment clause) because it is primarily from the written word that the common intention of the parties is to be ascertained. Language is to be construed in accordance with its ordinary and plain meaning, unless adopting this approach would lead to an absurdity or repugnancy, but in these latter situations, arbitrators will interpret the words used in a manner so as to avoid such results. However, it must be remembered that these particular principles of interpretation are to be used in the context of the written Agreement itself. It is also well recognized that a counterbalancing principle is that anomalies or ill-considered results are not sufficient to cause the alteration of the plain meaning of words. Neither is the fact that one interpretation of the Agreement may result in a (perceived) hardship to one party. I refer here (as I often do) to the seminal case of Re Massey-Harris Co. and U.A.W., Loc. 458 (1953), 4 L.A.C (Gale) at p. 1580:... we must ascertain the meaning of what is written into a clause and to give effect to the intention of the signatories to the Agreement as so expressed. If, on its face, the clause is logical and is unambiguous, we are required to apply its language in the apparent sense in which it is used, notwithstanding that the results may be obnoxious to one side or the other. In those circumstances, it would be wrong for us to guess that some effect other than that indicated by the language therein contained was contemplated or add words to accomplish a different result. Support for this approach is found in Re International Nickel Co. of Canada Ltd. and U.S.W. (1974), 5 L.A.C. (2d) 331 (Weatherill) at pp : It may be that the provisions of the collective agreement here in issue pose a problem of construction, so that they may be said to be of doubtful meaning in that very general sense. In our view, however, the interpretation of the notion of latent ambiguity to include generally all cases of doubtful meaning or application... should not be, and not was intended to be taken so far as to open the door to the admission of extrinsic evidence wherever a

12 11 disagreement as to the construction of a document arises. If that were allowed, the strength of a document such as a collective agreement would be greatly reduced, and the well-established rules respecting the admission of extrinsic evidence would be meaningless. It is well accepted that arguability as to [different] construction(s), standing alone, does not create an ambiguity, allowing the introduction of extrinsic evidence (in Re Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Telecommunications Union (1975), 8 L.A.C. (2d) 256 (H.D. Brown) at p 259). When ascertaining the common intention of the parties objective tests must be used and not to what the parties, post contractu, may wish to say was their intent, albeit with honesty and sincerity (Re Puretex Knitting Co. and C.T.C.U., Loc 560 (1975), 8 L.A.C. (2d) 371 (Dunn) at p It is also a well-accepted principle that the provisions of the Agreement are to be construed as a whole and that words and provisions are to be interpreted in context. I certainly accept this approach to interpretation. See Palmer, Collective Agreement Arbitration in Canada (3 rd ed.) p. 123, para and the seminal case of Massey Harris Co. and U.A.W., Loc. 439 (1947), 1 L.A.C. 68 (Roach) at p. 69: It is also a well-recognized rule of construction that where part of a document permits of two interpretations, that meaning is to be attached which best harmonizes with the whole of the document. That latter rule has been expressed thus, namely, that the tribunal charged with the responsibility of interpreting the document must attempt to so construe it that it will be an harmonious whole, and effect be given to every part of it. Another basic principle is that there is a general presumption against redundancy (see Palmer, supra, at p. 126). Put another way, it is to be (initially) assumed that the parties have not agreed to superfluous or unnecessary wording in crafting the Agreement. Therefore, to summarize, some of the basic principles which I will apply to assist me in the interpretive task I face are: 1.The parties are assumed to have intended what they have said and it is primarily from the express written provisions of the collective agreement that the common intention of the parties is to be ascertained; 2. Language is to be construed in accordance with its ordinary and plain

13 meaning; 12 3.Where part of a document permits of two interpretations, the meaning to be attached is that which best harmonizes with the whole of the document, or put another way, the provisions of the agreement are to be construed as a whole and words and provisions are to be interpreted in context; 4. The words used are to be interpreted in a manner so as to avoid an absurdity or repugnancy, but anomalies or ill-considered results are not sufficient to cause the alteration of the plain meaning of words. Neither is the fact that one interpretation of the collective agreement may result in a (perceived) hardship to one party. In final submissions, the Association s representative provided me with an exhaustive list of the collective agreement articles in which the word position was used. A review of this list establishes that other than in Schedule E, section 18 and on a couple of other occasions which are not relevant, the use of the word position in the collective agreement is synonymous with the word job or assignment, not shift. Counsel for the Board provided me with a similar list setting out all of the collective agreement articles in which the word shift appears and is used to describe a scheduled period of work or duty. In reviewing the collective agreement language before me, I can find no other occasion in which the word position appears to be broad enough to include the word shift. As noted above, as a general rule words used by the parties to a collective agreement are to be given their ordinary and plain meaning. The union urges me to conclude that the word position as used in section 18 (f) and (g) should be read as including the word shift. In the labour relations context, the word shift has a generally accepted meaning to refer to the period of time during which an employee is at work. Collective agreements ( as does this one) define shifts based on numerous criteria such as: the length of shifts ( ie eight or twelve hours); the time that certain shifts are worked ( day or afternoon shift); and how many shifts make up the accepted work week. Similarly the word position has a generally accepted meaning in the labour relations context. While it could be seen to be synonymous with words such as job or assignment it would be very unusual for it to include shifts worked by an employee as that word generally has a very different meaning.

14 13 Accordingly, I conclude that the word position in section 18 (f) and (g) does not include the word shift. As the parties called a great deal of evidence concerning past practice and devoted a significant amount of time in their final submissions to it, even though I have concluded that it is not appropriate to use it as an aid to interpretation, I would like to briefly address it. The representative for the Association pointed out in his final submissions that Schedule E contained references to scheduling as distinct from filling positions. The first obvious reference is in the title to sections 15 to 21 which states Scheduling/Filling of Vacancies. The second reference was in section 16 which addresses the maintenance of a departmental seniority list for scheduling purposes. Assuming for a moment that he is correct and that it was the intention of the parties when the language was agreed to in 1995 that section 18 be used for shift scheduling, in accordance with the agreed to facts, that was at a time when the scheduling of part -time employees was on an ad hoc basis. That changed in 2003 when the parties agreed to advance scheduling for part-timers. Therefore even if section 18 was at one time to be used in the scheduling of part-time employees when it was done on an ad hoc basis, that changed in Pursuant to the managements rights clause the board is entitled to schedule working hours and is entitled to put into place a policy to facilitate this process. There is nothing in Schedule E or anywhere else in the collective agreement that makes the portion of the civilian part-time scheduling policy which is in dispute and reads part-time members shall not have the right to refuse scheduled work or to make themselves unavailable to be scheduled for work except for emergent situations (i.e. personal illness, injury or medical emergency) a violation of the collective agreement. I would also point out that while it is clear that in scheduling employees for shifts the process outlined in section 18 was used by some, if not most, individuals who were

15 14 doing the scheduling of the part-time employees in the departments or pools of employees referred to in Schedule E, section 15 does not say that the language was intended by the parties to be used for shift scheduling. As was noted by the representative for the Association the majority of the scheduling of part-timers was done on a last minute basis. The process set out in section 18 for the filing of positions provides for a fair and reasonable distribution of opportunities based on a rotational and equitable basis. Or in other words, all qualified employees are to receive their fair share of opportunities based on a rotational basis. It makes perfect sense that this process was utilized to fill shift vacancies. However, it does not mean that the language was intended to be used for this purpose or that the Board is required, pursuant to the collective agreement, to schedule on this basis. For all of the above noted reasons, the grievance is therefore dismissed. In the event that the parties have any difficulties in the interpretation or implementation of this award, I shall remain seized. Dated in Toronto this day of October, 2008 APPENDIX A Janice Johnston Arbitrator LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING (2003) Between THE HAMILTON POLICE SERVICES BOARD (Hereafter Known as the Board) And

16 15 THE HAMILTON POLICE ASSOCIATION (Hereafter Known as the Association) REGULARLY SCHEDULED PART-TIME POSITIONS The parties hereto agree that the following terms shall apply to full-time Police Service employees who transfer to and assume regularly scheduled part-time positions with the Police Service, where there is no break in service between the change from full-time to part-time status: 1. "Regularly Scheduled Part-Time Employees" shall be defined as persons employed by the Police Service in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.3 of the Civilian Collective Agreement, and on a regularly scheduled basis. 2. All provisions of Schedule "E" to the Civilian Collective Agreement apply to regularly scheduled part-time employees, except as otherwise specified or varied herein. The following provisions of Schedule "E" are specifically not applicable to regularly scheduled part-time employees: paragraphs: 3, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21. However, notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule "E", it is agreed that the provisions of Article 14.3 of the Civilian Collective Agreement shall apply to regularly scheduled part-time employees. 3. Regularly scheduled part-time positions will be posted by the Police Service in accordance with the posting provisions of the Collective Agreement. 4. Regularly scheduled part-time employee will maintain the seniority and credited service accumulated while a full-time employee, and will continue to accumulate seniority on a pro-rated basis, based upon hours worked. For this purpose, regularly scheduled part-time employees shall earn seniority and credited service on the basis that 2,080 hours of work shall equal one year of service.

17 16 5. Shift schedules, hours of work and incidents thereto, including breaks, shall be as determined by Management. 6. Credited service and seniority accumulated as a full-time employee may be used for the purpose of calculation of vacation entitlement, vacation signing, application for postings within the Service and lay-off recall. Vacation entitlement shall be calculated in accordance with Article An immediate transfer from full-time employment to regularly scheduled part-time employment, where there is no break in service, shall not be considered a "termination of service". Accordingly, the provisions of Schedule "B", Article 17(a) of the Civilian Collective Agreement shall not apply. The sick bank existing to the credit of a regularly scheduled part-time employee at the time of transfer shall be frozen. Regularly scheduled part-time employees shall not accumulate sick bank credits after the point of transfer. However, a regularly scheduled part-time employee shall be entitled to use any sick credits in his/her bank, on a prorated basis, based on hours worked. Where the employment relationship between the Service and a regularly scheduled part-time employee is severed or terminated or the party retires in the manner specified therein, the provisions of Schedule "B", Article 17(a) of the Civilian Collective Agreement shall apply. 8. The provisions of paragraph 13, Schedule "E", to the Civilian Collective Agreement shall apply to regularly scheduled part-time employees.

18 17 APPENDIX B POLICY CIVILIAN PART-TIME SCHEDULING The intent of this policy is to address the procedure for scheduling civilian part-time employees in accordance to the Collective Agreement. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to all civilian part-time employees. PROCEDURE

19 18 Management shall exercise its right to direct the working force which includes the right to direct, plan and control working operations and to schedule working hours as per Article 2.1(a). Subject to provisions found within this procedure, part-time members shall not have the right to refuse scheduled work or to make themselves unavailable to be scheduled for work except for emergent situations (i.e. personal illness, injury or medical emergency.) Non Temporary Full-Time (TFT) Shifts will be scheduled in accordance to Article 1 and Schedule E of the Civilian Personnel Collective Agreement. The scheduling of part-time work will be as follows: 1. Shifts to be assigned to part-time members will be approved by the Supervisor of the branch. 2.Shifts scheduled for part-time staff will be posted with the regular full-time schedule, where possible. 3.Scheduling of shifts will be done on a rotational basis, by seniority, with consideration to the maximum monthly hours allowed. 4.In the event that a shift is to be filled after the schedule has been posted, the supervisor will offer the work to the next available person on a rotational basis using the seniority list. After these means have been exhausted, the call-in opportunity will be offered to full-time staff. 5.Once a part-time member accepts a call-in shift, it is to be considered a scheduled shift. Members who fail to report for a scheduled shift shall be considered as being absent without leave and may be subject to disciplinary actions. TFT positions will be awarded as outlined in Article 1 and Schedule E of the Civilian Personnel Collective Agreement. LUNCH AND BREAK TIMES The Civilian Personnel Collective Agreement, in respect to 8-hour employees, requires that a lunch period be allowed in accordance with the needs of the Service. For 10-hour workers, lunch is to be granted at a reasonable time during the shift. 12-hour workers are entitled to two lunch breaks, one in each 6-hour portion of the shift. Smokers must take their breaks to smoke during one of their designated break periods. Lunch periods are based on time worked - not time scheduled. There is no requirement to provide lunch breaks for the time period that an employee is not here working.

20 19 The following guidelines should be used when determining lunch hour entitlements, as per schedule E of the collective agreement: Lunch and break entitlement 3 to 4 hours worked 15 minute rest period only 4 to 5 hours worked 30 minute lunch only 5 to 8 hours worked 30 minute lunch and one 15 minute rest period 8 to 10 hours worked 60 minutes and two 15 minute rest periods 10 to 12 hours worked 75 minute lunch 12 hours or more worked two (2) 60 minute lunches Late Lunches - the granting of late lunches, on a regular basis, will not be allowed. However, if a member is faced with an exigent circumstance, the option for a late lunch will be granted on an ad hoc, without prejudice basis, with the direct approval of a Supervisor. Early lunches (time at start) - will be treated in the same manner. Break times - may only be moved or combined with lunch times on an ad hoc, without prejudice basis, with the direct approval of a Supervisor. No compensation will be provided for lost breaks. Missed Lunches - if a part-time member misses a lunch, the extra hour will be added to his/her regular earnings (not in the overtime column). Indicate with an asterisk that the extra hour is for a missed lunch so it is not paid at an overtime rate. SWITCHING SHIFTS Subject to the written approval of a supervisor, and in advance of the shift, the switching of shifts among part-time members will be allowed where the member can find a replacement of equal qualification. Subject to the written approval of a supervisor, and in advance of the shift, the switching of shifts among TFT, part-time, and full-time members will be allowed where the member can find a replacement of equal qualification and no over-time incurred as a result. GIVING AWAY SHIFTS Subject to the written approval of a supervisor, and in advance of the shift, a part-time or a TFT member may give away a scheduled shift to a member of equal qualifications. This will be allowed provided that the member has not exceeded the 104 hours per month maximum hours of work and there is no over-time incurred as a result.

21 20 LEAVES OF ABSENCE Members may request a leave of absence, without pay, as per the collective agreement. MEDICAL TIME OFF REQUESTS The Civilian Personnel Collective Agreement does not provide any entitlement of paid medical time off for PT or TFT members. However, we do recognize that part-time members may need time off for a medical appointment. In the event of a medical appointment which has been scheduled prior to the posting of the duty roster, the member will provide the medical appointment date to the supervisor in writing. Once the schedule is posted, it is expected that PT and TFT members will make every effort to book medical appointments on their days off. If an unplanned medical appointment is required during a member s scheduled shift, the member must notify the supervisor as soon as practicable. SICK TIME If a part-time member is sick, they must call in before the start of each shift and indicate how long the absence will be. For scheduling purposes, the part-time member is required to notify the supervisor as soon as possible, when they are able to return to work. This time will be non-paid and marked as sick time. The Supervisor may request a Doctor s certificate. ANNUAL LEAVE ENTITLEMENT AND SIGNING Each part-time member is entitled, under Schedule E, to vacation entitlement as per the Employment Standards Act which is two (2) weeks vacation (annual leave). When the time is taken, it will be non-paid as part-time members are already paid a percentage of salary each pay. Members must comply with the Employment Standards Act. Where an individual part-time member has been hired to back fill for a specific full-time member, the full time member will sign his/her annual leave first and the part-time member will sign on the same list after the full-time member has signed all their annual

22 21 leave. This will ensure that there is coverage at all times. Where there are multiple part-time members, each individual department will develop a part-time signing list subject to minimum staffing requirements and the needs of the service. OTHER TIME OFF REQUESTS Part-time members can request other time off in the wish book provided within each department. The rules for the wish book are determined within each department. This time off request is not guaranteed and is subject to exigencies and supervisor approval. RESPONSIBILITIES Members Members must ensure that they know the policy and report to work as scheduled. Any time off requests must be made in writing to the supervisor as outlined above. Supervisors Supervisors must ensure that this policy is applied consistently and fairly and must review and approve or deny all requests made in writing by any part time member. Human Resources Human Resources will maintain a part-time member seniority list.