Chronology of events concerning CSC’s NGWD committees

It’s been a long time since USGE has posted an article on this important issue for our members. There hasn’t been much news to report since, in our opinion, the process was not sufficiently streamlined. Before explaining further what we mean by this and how USGE has decided to address the situation, we invite the reader to review the following articles previously posted on the USGE website.

Communication to proceed with resolution of job content grievances 

USGE making some headway with the review of National Generic Work Descriptions (NGWD)

USGE identified there were too many people from the Union side who had their fingers in the same pie. Although everyone brought something of importance to the table, USGE felt that the number of participants could be reduced in order to simplify the process.

For example, in November 2010, the National Generic Work Descriptions (NGWD) revised by the incumbents of the positions were sent to the PSAC Representation Section for consultation and comment. This review was part of PSAC’s effort to assist USGE in our ongoing attempt to resolve a large number of these work description grievances at the Component level. These consultations identified and demonstrated the following general concerns:

  • often, the revised work descriptions do not clearly identify any new and/or missing job duties or tasks;
  • generally speaking, the revised work descriptions have been clearly rewritten with a view to impacting and changing the classification assigned to that description and this was, in fact, confirmed in several discussions with incumbents.

The above issues need to be addressed in order to move forward with discussions with the Employer. Unless incumbents can clearly identify new or missing duties or tasks that they have been required by the Employer to perform, it will be unlikely that they will be successful in having the desired changes to the work descriptions implemented. Ultimately, their work descriptions grievances may be denied.

PSAC and USGE believe that it is critical for the grievors to be part of the process as early as possible since it is their work and they are really in the best position to defend, explain and substantiate or provide evidence in support of any proposed change to their work descriptions.

USGE and PSAC agree that since we are in agreement on the best practices for the process of resolving these grievances as early as possible in the process, it would make sense that USGE contact the PSAC Representation Section when seeking very specific advice or support in regards to a particular work description(s), rather than continuing to send revised descriptions to PSAC for review.

In conclusion, PSAC and USGE are confident we are on the right track in terms of how to deal with these grievances.

In preparation for upcoming NGWD committee meetings, the USGE National Office will provide a list of incumbents to the respective CSC RVPs. From that list, the RVPS and their locals will then choose a minimum of one representative. Those names will be returned to the USGE National Office and those chosen will be working with the National Office to review the NGWD. They will also assist the USGE National Office on an as-needed basis. A USGE Labour Relations Officer (LRO) will assist incumbents with their NGWD revision and will also, along with incumbents who participated in the revision, make the presentation to the CSC Functional Head responsible for these positions.