Re Metropolitan Authority (Metro Transit Division) and ATU, Local 508
Union Grievance, Driver-Instructor, Qualification, Jurisdiction, Part-Time, Arbitrability, Seniority
The union's grievance held that the employer failed to select candidates for a driver-instructor position according to qualification set out in the agreement. The employer raised the preliminary objection that the arbitrator was without jurisdiction because the part-time assignment of employees as driver-instructors was inarbitrable. The parties agreed to allow the arbitrator to make a finding as to the arbitrability of the issue and to determine which if any provisions of the agreement are applicable. In the dispute as to whether the driver-instructor position was a new job, the employer held that it was not a new position; the union maintained the employer's posted notice was a regular job posting. The two candidates eventually selected were not the most senior applicants because the employer gave greater priority to their ability to train, evaluate and communicate than to their employment seniority. The employer testified that a similar posting procedure had been used for recruiting tour guides, that candidates for those positions were not selected on the basis of seniority and that the union had not grieved that procedure. Similarly, seniority was not a factor in the procedure for selecting maintenance-instructors. The union argued that the selection was governed by job posting provisions in the agreement, that the employer was bound to act reasonably and without discrimination. The employer maintained that the temporary assignments were not new positions and that no position, vacancy or transfer was created. Based on its management rights, it had full responsibility to choose the driver-instructors.
Re Metropolitan Authority (Metro Transit Division) and ATU, Local 508 (1991), 1991 CanLII 12634, 24 CLAS 442 (NSLA) (Arbitrator: Innis Christie).