Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Job evaluation in the forest industry in British Columbia 1973

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1973_A4_5 L82.pdf [ 12.37MB ]
UBC_1973_A4_5 L82.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0093090.json
JSON-LD: 1.0093090+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0093090.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0093090+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0093090+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0093090+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0093090.ris

Full Text

JOB EVALUATION IN THE FOREST INDUSTRY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA by Leland James Luckhurst A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Business Administration in the Faculty of COMMERCE AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1973. In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada ABSTRACT Job evaluation is a technique which has proved useful in the forest industry in British Columbia. Its major benefit has been the provision of a responsible climate for collective bargaining. A secondary benefit has been the provision for a meaningful basis of measuring productivity. The dissertation examines job evaluation in three areas. The first section studies some of the relevant theory of job evaluation as i t applies to the forest industry in British Columbia. The evolution of Plywood Job Evaluation is followed by the recently introduced Southern Interior study. The concluding section ponders the future of job evaluation as i t may apply to B.C. Coast Sawmills. Certainly, job evaluation comes highly recommended by this writer as a possible means of solving several of the cantankerous problems which have plagued the forest industry in British Columbia. Dr. J.W.C. Tomlinson TABLE OF CONTENTS I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . . . Section. I . Chapter I Job Evaluation: D e f i n i t i o n Purposes, History . . . Chapter II Methods of Job Evaluation Chapter I I I Plywood Job Evaluation: History . Chapter IV Plywood Job Evaluation: Job Factors Chapter V The Wage Curve . . . . . . Chapter VI Plywood Job Evaluation: Analysis Section 2 Chapter VII Sawmilling in B.C.: Present Status . . . . Chapter VELT Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation: History Chapter IX Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation: Develop- ment of the Manual . . . Chapter X Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation: Job Factors and Wage Curve Chapter XI Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation: Analysis Paga D. Section 3 Chapter XTI B.C. Coast Sawmill and Logging Job Evaluation: History Chapter XIII B.C. Coast Sawmill and Logging Job Evaluation: Factors and Wage Curve 128 Chapter XIV B.C. Coast Sawmill and Logging Job Evaluation: Analysis II4.3 E. Chapter XV Summary and Conclusions . . . 154. F. Bibliography . . - 163 G. Appendices I. The Wilkinson Report: Plywood Job Evaluation Summary of Recommendations 168 I I . Plywood Job Evaluation Manual . . 188 I I I . Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation . . . 2 0 2 H. Exhibits I. Master Agreement: A r t i c l e VTI Plywood Job Evaluation . . . . . 217 I I . Plywood Job Evaluation: as referred to in Art. VII, Sec. 1 219 Page I I I . Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program: Job Description . . . . 225 IV. Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program: Request for Job Evaluation 227 V. Costs: Job Evaluation 229 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Job Evaluation Plans in Industry . . . J 10 2. Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program Point-Grade-Rate-Chart 20 3„ Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program Factors and Point Values 1966 . . . 2? 4. Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program Factors and Point Values 1971 . . . 28 5. Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program Factors - Percentage Weightings . . 29 6. Plywood Industry Job Evaluation Program Point-Grade-Rate-Chart 32 7. Strikes in Coast Lumber Industry in B.C. 1949-1969 48 8. Production of Major Forest Industries 1971 Actual and 1975, 1985 Forecast 56 9. Capital Investment for Machinery and Equipment Per Employee in the Wood- Manufacturing Industry, 1963-1971; B r i t i s h Columbia 63 10. C a p i t a l Investment for Machinery and Equipment Per Employee in the Wood- Manufacturing Industry, 1963-1971; Canada 64 Table Page 11. Estimates of Primary Forest Production, 1963-1971 . . . . . . . 65 12. LurrJoer Production, 1963-1971 . . . . . 66 15, Logging Employment, 1963-1971 . . . . 6? 14. Wood Products Manufacturing Employment, 1963-1971 68 15. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : O r i g i n a l Factor T i t l e s . . . . 78 16. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : Summary of Grading Results - Southern I n t e r i o r . 81 17. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : Summary of Grading Results - Kamloops 82 18. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : Summary of Grading Results - Kelowna 83 19. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : Summary of Grading Results - Cranbrook . 84 20. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : D i s t r i b u t i o n of 83 Test Study Jobs Before and After Evaluation . . 87 Table Page 21. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : D i s t r i b u t i o n of 35 Test Study Jobs at Grand Forks Sawmills Before and After Evaluation 89 22. Comparison of Factor Weightings: Plywood Evaluation versus Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation . . . . 91 23. Knowledge and S k i l l Factor Comparisons: Plywood Evaluation versus Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation . . . . 93 24. E f f o r t Factor Comparisons: Plywood Evaluation versus Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation 93 25. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Factor Comparisons: Plywood Evaluation versus Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation . . . . 9Z4- 26. Job Conditions Factor Comparisons: Plywood Evaluation versus Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation . . . . 9Z4. 27. I n t e r i o r Sawmill Industry Job Evalua- t i o n Program: Point-Grade-Rate-Chart 96 28. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalua- t i o n : Point-Range Increments . . . . 99 29. F.I.R.L. Logging Job Evaluation: Plan Weightings 131 Table Page 30. F.I.R.L. Logging Job Evaluation: E f f e c t s on Present (1967) Rates. . 132 21. F.I.R.L. Logging Job Evaluation: Comparison of Plan Weightings . . 133 32. Job Evaluation P i l o t Project: Wage Structure for B.C. Coast Logging Industry, June 15, 1967 134 33. B.C. Coast Sawmilling and Logging Job Evaluation: Factors (Percentages) 130 34. B.C. Coast Sawmilling and Logging Job Evaluation: Factor Description . . 137 35. B.C. Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation: Grade-Rate-Chart l4l LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Plyvood Wage Curve 1959 and 1973 . .. 33 2. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Wage Curve 1973 97 3. B.C. Coast Logging Wage Curve 1967 Plan A 135 4. B.C. Coast Logging Wage Curve 1967 Plan D . 136 5. B.C. Coast Sawmill Proposed Wage Curve 1972 ^ 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My appreciation and gratitude i s extended to Dr. -J.W.C. Tomlinson for his help and encouragement throcrho~t the duration of thi s undertaking. He was never reluctant to discuss the problems I encountered and his in s i g h t s , advice, and c r i t i c i s m s proved invaluable. The d i r e c t i o n , suggestions, and c r i t i c i s m s of Dr. Noel H a l l and Dr. Stuart Jamieson are also g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged. In addition, I would l i k e to thank the members of the International Woodworkers of America and the management associations. Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations and the I n t e r i o r Forest Labour Relations Association, who so generously granted me personal interviews. A s p e c i a l note of thanks i s due to Lome Fingarson for the numerous telephone c a l l s , personal interviews, and l i t e r a t u r e which he graciously provided. My thanks also to Clara Shamanski and my wife Nancy. Clara was accurate, fast, and remarkably calm during the he c t i c days of e d i t i n g and typing. Nancy p a t i e n t l y perservered i n the arduous task of reducing my handwritten copy into l e g i b l e English. INTRODUCTION This study examines the evolution of job evalua- t i o n in the forest industry of B r i t i s h Columbia. I t is designed to be a working paper which considers three questions: (1) "Is job evaluation worthwhile as a technique * i n union-management r e l a t i o n s ? " (2) "How can job evaluation be conducted and implemented? H (3) "Can job evaluation be extended to other sectors of the forest industry?" The thesis i s organized in three major sections which correspond to the framework outlined. The f i r s t looks p r i m a r i l y at the theory of job evaluation and how i t has worked in the Plywood Industry. The second sec t i o n involves a d e t a i l e d study of the recently implemented Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation Plan. The problems of extend- ing job evaluation to other sectors of the economy, s p e c i f i c a l l y sawmills on B.C.'s coast and the logging sector, are examined in the t h i r d and concluding s e c t i o n . The time span involved covers the period 1955-'59, when the Plywood plan was drafted, 1967-'71, when the Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill plan was implemented, through to the future when, and i f , the Coast Sawmill and Logging plans are f i n a l l y i n s t a l l e d . CHAPTER I JOB EVALUATION: DEFINITION, PURPOSES, HISTORY Simply stated, job evaluation i s a process for "determining the value of a job within a fi r m r e l a t i v e to a l l other jobs i n that f i r m . " 1 "Job Evaluation i s the extension of job analysis to ascertain r e l i a b l y the r e l a t i v e worth of jobs, to transform these appraisals into a structure of adequate rates, and to provide standard procedures for a l l additions to, and adjustments 2 i n , the rate structure." The o r i g i n a l Job Evaluation Manual prepared by Stevenson & Kellogg, Ltd., for the plywood industry i n September, 1955, stated "Job evaluation is a procedure for determining the value of an in d i v i d u a l job i n an organization in r e l a t i o n to the other jobs i n the organiza- t i o n . " That manual pointed out that while job evaluation forms an important step in the establishment of an orderly J.D. Dunn and F.M. Rachel, Wage and Salary Administration, New York, Mc-Graw H i l l Book Co., 1971, p. 167. 2 C.W. L y t l e , Job Evaluation Methods, New York, Ronald Press Co., 1954, p. 4. system of c l a s s i f y i n g jobs and determining wage rates, i t does not determine the absolute value of jobs i n d o l l a r s and cents. Rather, job evaluation determines only r e l a t i v e values, and these need not be expressed i n terms of money. Therefore, the plan of job evaluation outlined i n that matrial expressed r e l a t i o n s h i p s among jobs in terms of point values; the attachment of money values to the ratings developed by job evaluation was a separate process designed to follow agreement upon the r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Among other advantages, the use of point values enabled those concerned in job evaluation to concentrate t h e i r a t t e n t i o n upon the important issue of r e l a t i v e values of jobs without thinking s p e c i f i c a l l y in terms of money. This system has been extended from plywood to the Southern I n t e r i o r sawmills, and to the proposed Coast sawmill and logging plans. The decision to measure and rate jobs should only be made with the intent to accomplish c e r t a i n objec- tives and purposes important to management, the union, and the workers. Although there are many by-products of job evaluation, the purpose of introducing job evaluation in our fo r e s t industry was to work toward a s o l u t i o n of the many wage and sal a r y administrative problems which confronted the industry i n the la t e 1950's. 3 Stevenson & Kellogg, Ltd., (Consultant Engineers), Plywood Job Evaluation Manual, Vancouver, 1955, p. 1. The following constitute the primary purposes of job evaluation within B.C.'s forest industry:^ (1) Establishment of a general wage l e v e l f o r a given plant which w i l l have p a r i t y , or an otherwise desired r e l a t i v i t y , with those of neighbouring plants, hence with the average l e v e l of the l o c a l i t y (monetary considerations), (2) Establishment of correct d i f f e r e n t i a l s f or a l l jobs within the given p l a n t . Employees w i l l value, rank, and c l a s s i f y jobs regard- less of management a c t i o n . A job evaluation v program establishes d e f i n i t e groupings of, and r e l a t i o n s h i p s between jobs (non- economic considerations). (3) Provision of a systematic process by which new jobs can be introduced into the job structure with a minimum of disturbance. Growth and expansion of firms create the continued need for job design and redesign, and ultimately job evaluation and r e - evaluation. (4) Provision of a process which is capable of being understood and discussed throughout the firm. Differences of opinion regarding wage rates and values of jobs are i n e v i t a b l e . I t i s only l o g i c a l , then, that as long as these differences occur, reasonable solutions are possible only i f there i s a procedure or process to serve as the basis of disagreement. Properly conceived and administered, job evalua ti o n programs make several d i s t i n c t and usefu l secondary contrib u t i o n s : (1) Selection of employees. (2) Promotion and transfer of employees. (3) Training of new workers. J.L. Otis and R.H. Leukart, Job Evaluation, New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1954, p. 12. (4) Assignment of tasks to new jobs. (5) Accident prevention. (5) Improving working conditions. (7) Administrative organization. (8) Work S i m p l i f i c a t i o n . (9) Periodic analysis of wage rates, job functions, e t c . (10) F a c i l i t a t e c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. (11) Provision of a basis to handle technological change. C o l l e c t i v e l y , job evaluation f a c i l i t a t e s the making of safe plans for rearrangement and replacement of large numbers of workers. Without i t , decisions are often i n f l u - enced by various factors; favouritism of a superior, lack of a s p e c i f i c promotion and placement p o l i c y , poor estimation regarding the r a t i o of supply to demand, previously established precedents, etc. Job evaluation can do much to eliminate such imprecise and subjective influences, and was i n f a c t developed to counteract these i n f l u e n c e s . 5 Job Evaluation has been practised i n one form or another for over a century. For instance, as e a r l y as 1871, the U.S. C i v i l Commission developed Pay D i f f e r e n t i a l s based on job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Both the C i t y of Chicago and Common- wealth Edison began i n s t i t u t i n g job categories i n 1909. In 1928, the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co. adopted the Benge Plan which consisted of 5 Job Factors. However, i t was c l e a r l y the d i s r u p t i v e influence of the Great Depression L y t l e , Job Evaluation Methods, p. 10. which exposed the need for job evaluation, plunging manage- ment into the wage administration movement during the l a t t e r h a l f of the prolonged depression, 193 5-1940. The forerunner of the e x i s t i n g forestry plans was developed in 193 5 by Western E l e c t r i c Co. which adopted the Kress Plan, c o n s i s t i n g of 11 factors. This eventually became the o f f i c i a l plan of the International association of Machinists from which the plywood plan was derived i n 1955.^ Closer to home. Crown Zellerbach a t Camass, Washington, as e a r l y as 1936, developed tables, by job grade, to overcome problems in s e t t i n g equitable rates of pay. Since then, many other U.S.-based companies and industries have developed and adopted job evaluation programs. To name but a few. General E l e c t r i c , Proctor & Gamble, the Steel Industry, A i r c r a f t , Glass, Rubber, and Auto Industry have a l l employed successful job c l a s s i f i c a - t i o n systems. Loca l l y , the B.C. Forest Service, Dominion Bridge, B r i t i s h Ropes, American Can, and Alcan employ job analysis i n e s t a b l i s h i n g pay d i f f e r e n t i a l s . The Pulp and Paper industry i n t h i s province too have had job evaluation since 1964. This plan i s not examined because i t i s of a d i f f e r e n t nature from the other Frank Paul, "Seminar on Plywood Evaluation", (Speech given A p r i l 29, 1970, V i l l a Motor Inn, Burnaby, B.C.) f o r e s t i n d u s t r y plans to be considered here. Secondly, i n the e s t i m a t i o n of the w r i t e r , the p l a n i s not worthy of c o n s i d e r a t i o n as i t s u f f e r s from s e v e r a l s e r i o u s t e c h n i c a l d e f i c i e n c i e s . T h i r d , the purpose of t h i s a n a l y s i s i s to remain w i t h i n c e r t a i n l i m i t s so as t o prevent the study from becoming too broad and u n w i e l d l y . CHAPTER II METHODS OF JOB EVALUATION A l l methods of job evaluation are v a r i a t i o n s of one c f four basic types: (1) Job Ranking, (2) Job C l a s s i f i c a - t i o n , (3) Factor Comparison, and (4) Point Rating. Regard- l e s s of the method, the success of any job evaluation program is dependent upon f u l l understanding of the p a r t i c u l a r system being used and achieving of consistency in i t s a p p l i c a - t i o n . Management must decide what elements or c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of various jobs w i l l be the basis for evaluation. That i s to say the firm must e s t a b l i s h exactly what i t is w i l l i n g to pay the employees. Therefore, s e l e c t i o n of "compensable" factors i s one of the most important steps i n compensation practice and i n the process of job evaluation. Requirements for selected compensable factors include: (1) Consistency and uniformity. (2) O b j e c t i v i t y . (3) Broad and general enough to be present and i d e n t i f i a b l e to varying degrees i n a l l jobs. (4) Determination of the r e l a t i v e importance of each of four standard f a c t o r s : s k i l l , e f f o r t , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , working conditions. (5) Deliberate and c a r e f u l weighting o f factors depending on importance assigned. (6) A b u i l t - i n system for p e r i o d i c reevaluation. Each of the four basic methods of job evaluation u t i l i z e s the concept of compensable f a c t o r s . The method of job evaluation adopted by the B.C. f o r e s t industry is known as a "point system" or as "point r a t i n g " . In b r i e f , i t consists of analyzing the job, appraising or evaluating separately the factors, (s-^ch.as education, experience, and working conditions) which have been selected as important i n the work of jobs under review, and combining the separate evaluations into a s i n g l e point score for each job. In applying t h i s method, i t i s presumed that there are c e r t a i n elements or job factors that e x i s t i n varying degrees as r e q u i r e - ments of a l l jobs. To c i t e an obvious example, a l l jobs require some physical e f f o r t ; i t is apparent, however that some jobs require considerably more physical e f f o r t than others J The point rating method of job evaluation remains the most widely used. In a rather dated study, Smyth found that 81 percent of 112 job evaluation plans were point r a t i n g plans and that 13 percent were factor comparison plans:^ 'Stevenson & Kellogg, Plywood Manual, p. 2. 8R. C. Smyth, "Job Evaluation Plans", Factory Management and Maintenance, Vo l . 110, No. 1, pp. 118-121, January, 1952. Job Evaluation Plans In Industry Number of Type of Plan Organ i za t j oris ;1) Ranking 3 (2) Grade or C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 55 (2) Point 123 (4} Facte-r Comparison 75 (5) Cenbination 66 Total 322 There i s l i t t l e evidence that the popularity of the point plan has diminished. The widespread use of point r a t i n g , as well as of factor comparison, seems to be j u s t i - f i e d by the alleged o b j e c t i v i t y achieved by these methods, although the two are b a s i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t . The advantages and l i m i t a t i o n s of each of the four basic types of job evaluation plans have been summarized neatly by Dunn and Rachel: 9 (1) Ranking Method This method involves compiling a l i s t of jobs into a rank order from high to low. The ranking method i s p a r t i c u l a r l y suited for small firms: f o r firms where* jobs are e a s i l y separated into categories such as " o f f i c e " , "factory", and "professional"r and when the number of jobs to be evaluated i s not too l a r g e . Dunn and Rachel, Wage Administration, pp. 172-183. Advantages zxu (a) Simplest of a l l procedures and requires l i t t l e tine or paper work; the d i r e c t cost of the a p p l i c a t i o n i s n e g l i g i b l e . (b) Eliminates p e r s o n a l i t i e s and i s thus superior to old-fashioned rate s e t t i n g . (c) I f checked with outside standard job d e s c r i p - tions, i t gives p r a c t i c a l but rough job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . (d) Although crude, i t i s p r a c t i c a l enough to avoid any hypocrisy of seeming to be s c i e n t i f i c . (e) Acceptable to unions because i t leaves more room for bargaining. Disadvantages: (a) No one committee member i s l i k e l y to be f a m i l i a r with a l l jobs. (b) Appraising each job as a whole does not f a c i l - i t a t e analysis and cannot be expected to give accurate measures of worth. (c) Ranking i s l i k e l y to be influenced by the magnitude of e x i s t i n g rates or other apparent "halo e f f e c t s " . (d) Equal d i f f e r e n t i a l s are sometimes assumed between adjacent ranks, and such assumptions are frequently i n c o r r e c t . (e) Very l i b e r a l range l i m i t s must be provided to c o r r e c t bad guesses. The ranking method of job evaluation was rejected by the f o r e s t industry because i t could not comprehensively encompass the vast s i z e of the industry in B.C., p a r t i c u l a r l y L y t l e , Job Evaluation Methods, pp. 37-38. the large employers l i k e Crown Zellerbach, Northwood, e t c . Since the ranking method is rather general in a p p l i c a t i o n , -he exact procedure varies considerably, depending upon experience, t r a i n i n g and other circumstances surrounding i t s :se.""" The industry f e l t that such a wide variance could -ot be tolerated i f such a system was e f f e c t e d . (2) Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Method The job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n method i s an improvement on the simple ranking method although the procedure i s e s s e n t i a l l y the same. The difference involves the assign- ment of jobs into classes or groups without concern for the d e f i n i t e ordering of jobs within those groups. Groups are of course ranked, however. 1 9 Advantages: (a) The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n method has a d i s t i n c t advantage as long as the formal c l a s s i f i c a - tions agree with employees' informal c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . (b) Grade groupings of jobs are created auto- matically with the evaluation system. This promotes and eases acceptance by employees and i l l u s t r a t e s c l e a r l y the progression and promotional sequence within the f i r m . Dunn and Rachel, Wage Administration, pp. 172-183. I b i d . Disadvantages: (a) The most serious l i m i t a t i o n is the d i f f i c u l t y and time involved in w r i t i n g group and c l a s s descriptions which serve to indicate to manage- ment which compensable factors should be rewarded. (b) D i f f i c u l t i e s are encountered in p r i c i n g the job structure, as balancing of compensable factors to determine r e l a t i v e l y equal jobs often causes misunderstanding with employees and labour leaders. For these reasons, the forest industry rejected the job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the experience in plywood evaluation has been that the evaluators could not keep up i n w r i t i n g descriptions and were some one hundred new descriptions behind in 1972. I f they had used a job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system, i t is l i k e l y they would be even further behind because descriptions are generally more comprehensive (see Plywood Job Description Form). (3) Factor Comparison Method The factor comparison method i s superior to other systems i n two ways: (1) Evaluation can be c a r r i e d out d i r e c t l y i n d o l l a r s and cents, and (2) Jobs are evaluated by d i r e c t comparison with key jobs and other previously ' evaluated jobs. In some instances (plywood evaluation), evaluation i n d o l l a r s and cents may be a disadvantage. Advantages; (a) Factor-comparison plans are tailor-made for a p a r t i c u l a r organization and use key jobs and wage rates from the organization i t s e l f . (b) Factor comparison dictates that jobs be evaluated by d i r e c t comparison with other jobs . 'c) Once the method i s established, i t i s r e l a t i v e l y simple and easy to use,- i t i s a method with which a l l concerned are l i k e l y to f e e l comfortable. (d) The evaluation scale need not be converted > from abstract point values into monetary units . Disadvantages: (a) I t is assumed that the key jobs used are free from wage i n e q u i t i e s . I f rate i n e q u i t i e s do e x i s t , the en t i r e job evaluation and subsequent wage rates w i l l be skewed. The problem may be circumvented i f less obvious key jobs where equity can be established can be found. (b) I n i t i a l construction i s complex and d i f f i c u l t to explain throughout the organization. (c) Considerable c l e r i c a l d e t a i l work i s necessary to administer the plan. The forest industry raised several objections to t h i s type of plan: ( 1 ) D i r e c t monetary values were not desired by e i t h e r union or management so that some f l e x i b i l i t y i n bargaining could be retained; ( 2 ) The geographical area i s large and the industry i s diverse between areas creating inequities among key jobs in d i f f e r e n t s e c t o r s — f l e x i b i l i t y was desired to handle i n d i v i d u a l s i t u a t i o n s ; ( 3 ) administration 1 3 I b i d . 15 costs were too high to be acceptable to management—management was not w i l l i n g to "foot the b i l l " for the extra administra- tion required i n such a plan. (4) Point Method As explained, the point method consists of evaluat- ing a job on the basis of point values with respect to previously selected compensable factors to a r r i v e at i t s t o t a l point value. Advantages t^-4 (a) The point r a t i n g plan i s widely used, permitting comparisons with other industries and firms. (b) I t i s the simplest of the quantitative methods of job evaluation. (c) Point values are e a s i l y converted to job and wage classes with a minimum of confusion and d i s t o r t i o n . (d) Point r a t i n g plans are generally s t a b l e — a p p l i c a b l e to a wide range of jobs over an extended period of time. Consistency and uniformity follow. (e) Point r a t i n g tends to be more objective than other comparative methods, providing a d e f i n i t i v e approach requiring several separate and d i s t i n c t judgment decisions. Thus, though errors tend to cancel one another, there are d i s t i n c t dangers of cumulative rather than random errors occurring. Disadvantages t (Mostly t h e o r e t i c a l i n nature) (a) The point method assumes that a l l jobs are equally involved in the same r e l a t i o n s h i p because a fi x e d number of compensable factors i s selected and a degree scale with fixed points i s assigned. , Therefore, evaluation depends on how well factors ^ and weights have been l a i d - o u t . ~~- z (b) Because fixed factors and degree values are used, evaluation of a job may be based on a preconceived fixed standard with l i m i t e d comparison among jobs. l 4 I b i d . 16 Again, the success with which factors and weights have been assigned w i l l be a determin- ing f a c t o r . (c) Employees may have d i f f i c u l t y understanding d e t a i l e d procedures i f trouble i s not taken to explain and i n t e r p r e t wage r e v i s i o n . However, experience has determined that where wage increases are forthcoming, employees are able to exercise a remarkable degree of concentra- t i o n . The point r a t i n g system was selected by management and union for a l l job evaluation plans in B.C.'s f o r e s t industry. The major reason being that i t was adaptable to a huge industry where job content among firms i s e s s e n t i a l l y the same, hence "benchmark" jobs could be chosen as a basis for f i x e d standardization. Secondly, a quantitative rather than q u a l i t a t i v e system was desired and point r a t i n g i s the simplest quantitative a n a l y s i s . The attractiveness of abstract point values which could be e a s i l y converted to d o l l a r s and cents, rather than s t r a i g h t monetary units, helped to c l i n c h the e l e c t i o n of point rating over factor comparison. Closer examination of the point r a t i n g system i s deferred to the sections of the study which are d i r e c t l y concerned with the d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s . 1 CHAPTER I I I PLYWOOD EVALUATION: HISTORY The plywood program became a necessity in 1955, when during contract negotiations, the union proposed re v i s i o n s to 60 plywood job-rate categories ranging from to 25C? t h i s made an orderly settlement on the old basis of negotiations impossible. Therefore, i t was b i l a t e r a l l y decided to adopt job evaluation. Stevenson & Kellogg, Engineering Management Consultants, were retained to develop a s u i t a b l e plan, and to test and recommend the s e l e c t i o n of two job evaluators, one from Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations (F.I.R.) and one from the International Woodworkers of America (I.W.A.). The program constructed was a v a r i a t i o n of the Machinists plan, and many of the bench mark jobs established s t i l l e x i s t today. Although i t was o r i g i n a l l y intended that the program would be operational in 6 months, i n f a c t i t took from 1955 through 1958 to study jobs, prepare descriptions and s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , and to rate jobs accordingly. I t a l s o took 1% years to negotiate the wage curve plus several weeks to write pertinent clauses into the contract. After a 70 day s t r i k e in the summer of 1959, a mutually acceptable formula, which provided a 4 cent increments between 10 point grades was f i n a l l y established. Grade 1 jobs included a l l jobs with a point t o t a l of 81 or l e s s ; these jobs received the base rate (presently $4.03% per hour). Those ranging from 82-91 points are Grade 2 jobs, receiving 4C above base r a t e . The highest grace attainable at that time was Grade 21, jobs with a poin- t o t a l of 272-281. Recently, the a d d i t i o n of 4 grades 15 has brought t o t a l points attainable up to 321. E s s e n t i a l l y , t h i s was just a way of paying higher rates throughout the scheme without necessitating wholesale r e v i s i o n and r e - negotiation in d e t a i l . The plywood plan pioneered evaluation in Canada as i t was the f i r s t Canadian industry to adopt evaluation as a u n i t , consisting, at that time, of 8 companies, 11 plants (Coast) and 6000 employees. This u n i t has now increased to 15 plants under j o i n t evaluation on the Coast, with an a d d i t i o n a l 7 plants in the I n t e r i o r , 1 i n Alberta, and about 3-5 more to come in the near future. There are, at present, 2 plants on the Coast not operating under evaluation as both are Co-op enterprises. Undoubtedly, job evaluation would s t i l l be v a l i d regardless of ownership. However, the cost of acquiring such a program by a non- association (F.I.R.) member would l i k e l y prove p r o h i b i t i v e . * 5Frank Paul, "Seminar on Plywood Evaluation", (Speech given A p r i l 29, 1970, V i l l a Motor Inn, Burnaby, B.C.). Between September, 1959, and March, 1963, the plan ran r e l a t i v e l y smoothly, with constant reevaluation of jobs- In A p r i l , 1963, a Memorandum of Agreement was signed, providing for an increase of an a d d i t i o n a l 1£ in the w~gs increments between successive grades, from and including Grade 7 and up to accelerate the wage curve. As a r e s u l t there remains to t h i s day a 4£ d i f f e r e n c e between i n d i v i d u a l grades from Grade 1 to 6 i n c l u s i v e , and a 5C increment between i n d i v i d u a l grades from Grade 7 to Grade 25 (see Table 1). During 1965 and e a r l y 1966, pressure was brought to bear by both management and the union to remedy problems with "spreader" crews who were becoming increasingly d i f f i - c u l t to r e t a i n . As a r e s u l t , a major r e v i s i o n to the Manual was undertaken in 1966 upon the recommendation of Mr. Justice N.T. Nemetz. At that time, points were taken from the factors Education and Experience and added to the factor R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for Material, Equipment, and Product, thereby increasing i t s points by 60% and reducing the other two by 30% r e s p e c t i v e l y . This zero-sum approach was chosen to allow re-weighing of s p e c i f i c factors while keeping the remainder of the scheme in the same r e l a t i v e balance. Also, an eleventh factor, Manual Dexterity was introduced to the Manual to p r i m a r i l y adjust wages of employees i n the Spreader and Hot Press areas. As a d i r e c t r e s u l t of these r e v i s i o n s . PLYWOOD INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION PROGRAM POINT - GRADE - RATE - CHART PC INT S GRADE RATE 0 - i i 1 base rate 82 - 91 2 base rate plus 4£ 92 - 101 3 base rate plus 8£ 102 - 111 4 base rate plus 12£ 112 - 121 5 base rate plus 16£ 122 - 131 6 base rate plus 20£ 132 - 141 7 base rate plus 25£ 142 - 151 8 base rate plus 30£ 152 - 161 9 base rate plus 35£ 162 - 171 10 base rate plus 40£ 172 - 181 11 base rate plus 45£ 182 - 191 12 base rate plus 50£ 192 - 201 13 base ra.te plus 55£ 202 - 211 14 base rate plus 60£ 212 - 221 15 base rate plus 65£ 222 - 231 16 base rate plus 70£ 232 - 241 17 base rate plus 75£ 242 - 251 18 base rate plus 80£ 252 - 261 19 base rate plus 85£ 262 - 271 20 base rate plus 90$ 272 - 281 21 base rate plus 95£ 282 - 291 22 base rate plus $1.00 292 - 301 23 base rate plus $1.05 302 - 311 24 base rate plus $1.10 312 - 321 25 base rate plus $1.15 over 40% of the workers in the Plywood Industry received wage increases in addition to those granted across the board. Concurrently, another contentious issue had arisen, t h a t of Supervision; the union f e l t that the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and a p p l i c a t i o n of the evaluation formula did not compensate properly for supervisory r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Accordingly, i n discussions with F.I.R. and the I.W.A. i t was decided in the summer of 1968 to make c l e r i c a l adjust- ments to s p e c i f i c cateogires. During the e a r l y part of 1969, a Special Study was c a r r i e d out in most plants to remedy discrepancies among grades between plants concerning the positions of Core Feeders and/or Sheet Turners and/or Dryer Feeders. At t h i s time, a wholesale examination of the purposes of the plywood job evaluation program was i n s t i t u t e d to determine where and why problems were increasing; b a s i c a l l y t h i s aimed: (a) to determine equitable wage rates, based on job content, (b) to e s t a b l i s h correct d i f f e r e n t i a l s for a l l jobs within a basic job function, (c) To properly r e l a t e new jobs with those a l l ready established, (d) to set s u i t a b l e rates on jobs that have s i g n i f i c a n t changes in job requirements. Accordingly, Hugh Wilkinson, P. Eng., was appointed bv Justice N.T. Nemetz on November 30th, 1970, to a s s i s t the parties in a study of the plywood evaluation program. On January 19th, 1971, Wilkinson met with representatives of the parties with the purpose of c l a r i f y i n g the terms cf reference of the study. At that meeting Mr. John Moore, Pre s i f a c c of I.W.A. Regional Council No. 1, and Mr. John B i l l i n g s , President F.I.R., acting for the p a r t i e s , agreed on the following terms of reference (1) The study i s to be concerned with three a aspects of job evaluation p r a c t i c e s : i) The c r i t e r i a and procedures by which jobs are assigned point values; i i ) The p o l i c i e s for r e l a t i n g point values to wage rates ,- i i i ) The way the plan i s administered, p a r t i c u l a r l y with regard to the processing of new jobs and a p p l i c a - tions for a change in point value. (2) The methods of investigation are to be chosen and applied as I (Wilkinson) see f i t . (3) The report w i l l recommend such changes in the Job Evaluation Plan and i t s administration which appear to be in the interests of equity and good Labour-Management r e l a t i o n s h i p s . (4) The deadline for completion and implementation, s p e c i f i e d in A r t i c l e VII of the Master Agree- ment (1970) as A p r i l 1st, 1971, i s waived. The terms of reference which Wilkinson l a i d out represented a s i g n i f i c a n t departure from the e x i s t i n g manner in which the plywood plan was being administered. With the H.C. Wilkinson, "Plywood Job Evaluation", A Report Prepared for the I.W.A. and F.I.R., August 1, 1971, pp. 1-2. help of the two technical representatives of the p a r t i e s , Lome Fingarson for the Union and Keith Bennett for the Employers, information was gathered. V i s i t s to seven plywood m i l l s and numerous submissions from individuals a~d small groups supplemented Wilkinson's knowledge. Wilkinson predicated his recommendations on the theory that three basic problems were at the root of unrest:^- (1) The long delay between submission of a request for evaluation or reevaluation and * the f i n a l award of the Plywood Evaluation Committee;—sometimes over a year. (2) The remoteness and i n a c c e s s a b i l i t y of the processes of job evaluation to many employees. (3) The p r a c t i c e of giv i n g no reasons for the ru l i n g s on requests f o r evaluation. As a s o l u t i o n to the problem of "timeliness", Wilkinson vested more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the evaluation or reevaluation process in the Plant Review Committees. In t h i s way, the o v e r a l l Plywood Evaluation Committee would be r e l i e v e d of a great deal of work but, at the same time, provide insurance that the most time-consuming part of the process ( i . e . , development of approved job d e s c r i p t i o n to support each a p p l i c a t i o n for reevaluation) would receive immediate attention at the Plant l e v e l . In his report which s p e c i f i e d 14 recommendations, Wilkinson cautioned, "There seem to me to be two basic p r i n c i p l e s which must be s a t i s f i e d Ibid ., p. 7. by any j o i n t committee charged with an important, f a c t - 19 finding job." He continued to describe these p r i n c i p l e s as, (1) the two part i e s to be equally represented with respect to technical competence, continuity of experience v i t h the business of the committee, and the a b i l i t y to a r t i c u l a t e ideas and persuade others. Exact equality w i l l never e x i s t , but the inequality should not be continuous and one-sided; (2) the objective basis underlying Job Evaluation procedures must not be destroyed. The great strength of the process i s that, properly done, i t reduces the e f f e c t s of p o l i t i c a l expedience and s t r a t e g i c weakness as factors determining the r e l a t i v e wages for d i f f e r e n t jobs. A d e t a i l e d summary of the fourteen recommendations submitted by Wilkinson may be found in Appendix I . At t h i s point, the writer chooses to reserve judgement on the effectiveness of Wilkinson's recommendations and indeed, the success of plywood job evaluation to date. Ibid., p. 9. Ibid., pp. 9-10. CHAPTER IV PLYWOOD EVALUATION? JOB FACTORS The job factors to be used in a p a r t i c u l a r evaluation study are selected in terms of the general c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the range of jobs to be evaluated. A set of factors s u i t a b l e for evaluation of plywood plant jobs might not prove as s a t i s f a c t o r y i n the evaluation of c l e r i c a l jobs, while adequate evaluation of tech n i c a l and pr o f e s s i o n a l positions might require consideration of factors not important in e i t h e r of the other groups. The factors selected for the plywood study now number eleven and f a l l into four major groupings. A. Knowledge and S k i l l factors which indicate a require- ment for s p e c i f i c knowledge and s k i l l on the part of the i n d i v i d u a l who f i l l s the job. (1) Education (the exact l e v e l s are not s p e c i f i e d because i t was f e l t that the percentage weightings decided upon, to be discussed l a t e r , eliminated the common error of weighting general educational l e v e l higher than s p e c i f i c t e c h n i c a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ) . (2) Experience. (3) Complexity of Duties. (4) Manual Dexterity. ^Stevenson & Kellogg, L t d . (Consultant Engineers), Plywood Job Evaluation Manual, Vancouver, 1955, pp. 2-3. B. E f f o r t factors which take into account the demands of the job in physical exertion and mental and v i s u a l a p p l i c a t i o n . (5) Physical Demand. ( 6 ) .Mental and Vi s u a l Demand (these could have been separated perhaps). C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . The factors in this group appraise the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s which are inherent i n the performance cf the job. (7) R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s for Supervision. (8) R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the Safety of Others. (9) R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for Materials, Equipment, and Products. D. Job Conditions. These factors appraise the conditions of the job from the worker's point of view. The analysis i s i n terms of the disagreeable aspects of the job. (10) Hazards. (11) Working Conditions. In Appendix I I , each factor i s described and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n by factor degrees i s defined. The degrees of each factor being the s p e c i f i c requirements that are used to determine how much one job d i f f e r s from another within that p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r . Evaluation of job proceeds by comparing the job requirements or s p e c i f i c a t i o n s with the degree descriptions for each factor in order and assigning to the job a degree or l e v e l in each f a c t o r . Predetermined point values are provided for each degree, and the t o t a l point value of the job i s obtained by t o t a l l i n g the point values for a l l f a c t o r s . 2 2 (See Table 2 ) . 2 2 I b i d . , p. 3. - 18 - F A C T O R AND POINT VALUES 1966 F A C T O R DEGREES AND POINT V A L U E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL 1. Education 4 7 14 25 35 50 2. Experience 5 9 18 27 36 50 63 77 90 3. Complexity of Duties 5 15 25 40 60 80 4. Manual Dexterity 0 5 12 20 B. E F F O R T 5. Physical Demand 7 12 17 24 32 40 6. Mental Sc Visual Demand 5 10 17 25 35 C . RESPONSIBILITIES 7. Responsibility for Supervision 0 10 20 35 50 * 8. Responsibility for the 1 Safety of Others 5 10 15 20 25 9. Responsibility for Materials, Equipment, and Product 5 15 32 56 80 • D. JOB CONDITIONS 10. Hazards 0 5 10 15 20 11. V.*orki=.-r Conditions 5 10 17 23 30 Sources Fly^ood J? r - E v a l u a t i o n Manual„ 1971. CO o o n> '<} o o o cr w <! (» H-1 c SB ct o 3 03 is H H -O DEGREES AND POINT V A L U E S FAC TOR 1 l i 2 3 sir 4 4 5 5* A. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL I, Education • 4 8 12 16 21 25 - - - 2, Experience 5 7 9 14 18 23 27 32 36 '! S 50 3. Judgment and Initiative 5 10 15 20 25 33 40 50 60 70 4. Manual Dexterity 0 3 5 9 12 16 20 - _ - - B. E F F O R T 5. Physical Demand 7 10 12 15 17 21 24 28 32 36 40 6. Mental & Visual Demand 5 8 10 14 17 25 32 41 49 60 70 c . RESPONSIBILITIES 7. Responsibility for Supervision 0 5 10 15 20 28 35 43 50 8. Res. for the Safety of Others 5 8 10 13 15 18 20 23 25 - - 9. Process Responsibility 5 13 20 30 40 53 65 83 100 - - D. JOB CONDITIONS i 10. Hazards 0 3 5 8 10 13 15 j 18 20 - - 11. Working Conditions 5 8 10 14 17 20 23 j 27 30 - I I—' '•-1 > n H O > 2 O TJ O \-\ < > a w C O o o I •"0 The point values assigned to each of the eleven factors are not the same, since the job requirements are not of equal importance in the o v e r a l l worth of the job. The r e l a t i v e weighting i s approximately as follows: 1966 1971 Knowledge and S k i l l 46% 34.3% E f f o r t 14% 21.6% Respons i b i l i t i e s 30% 34.3% Job Cond i t ions 10% 9.8% 100% 100 % E f f o r t (physical) was weighted r e l a t i v e l y low, 14 per cent, in 1959 and 1966 at management's insi s t e n c e . This was a d i r e c t r e s u l t of the companies' b e l i e f that technology was continuing to remove p h y s i c a l e f f o r t . Re- weighting to 21.6% was recommended by Wilkinson i n 1971, a t the I.W.A.'s insistence, as compensation was not f o r t h - coming in other areas, i . e . incentive schemes, etc., to account f o r the low weighting i n i t i a l l y assigned to e f f o r t . Once the jobs to be evaluated have been rated and t o t a l point values obtained, the next step i s to c l a s s i f y each job on the basis of i t s t o t a l points into a job or wage group together with other jobs with approximately the same t o t a l point values. This procedure i s followed since the use of point scores d i r e c t l y i s cumbersome in administra- tion as well as unwieldly for purposes of o v e r a l l review and comparison of job r a t i n g s . Moreover, as noted previously, zha technique of job evaluation is not s u f f i c i e n t l y precise to draw such fine d i s t i n c t i o n s as would be implied i f each successive increase of one point in t o t a l point value bore a proportionate increase i n wage. In job evaluation, the importance of an objective a t t i t u d e among ra t e r s , supervisors, and others who p a r t i c i - pate by approval of preliminary or f i n a l ratings cannot be over-emphasized. The c a p a b i l i t i e s and aptitudes of the p a r t i c u l a r worker i n a job should not be described or rated since he may have shortcomings i n his performance of the job or may possess s k i l l s or other c a p a b i l i t i e s which exceed the requirements of the job. Job evaluation can be successful only i f consideration and appraisal by factors and degrees is applied against the actual demands required for an O k adequate performance of the work. In essence then, r a t i n g the job and not the man, i s the c r i t e r i o n f o r success. Precautions must be taken to avoid the dangers of misplaced reference based upon actual workers doing the job at the time i t i s rated. 2 3 I b i d . , p. 3. 2 4 I b i d . , p. 4. CHAPTER V THE WAGE CURVE P r i c i n g the job structure within an industry incorporates a l l the a c t i v i t i e s such as factors, degrees, e t c . previously discussed, plus some r e l a t i o n s h i p to the e x i s t i n g p r i c i n g structure. To a t t a i n the o b j e c t i v i t y s t r i v e n for during the evaluation process, considerable e f f o r t must be spent to avoid improper p r i c i n g of jobs and incorrect job grouping. In actual practice data gleaned from wage surveys and the evaluation process are most relevant i n adjusting the industry's f i n a l wage rates, determined l a r g e l y by the interaction of job classes and 25 money ra t e s . Therefore, job p r i c i n g can be considered as c o n s i s t i n g of two separate operations: (1) determining job classes and respective wage rates, and (2) adjusting the wage rates to meet established company p o l i c i e s , industry trends, unusual supply and demand si t u a t i o n s , and other s i g n i f i c a n t c r i t e r i a which might influence the f i n a l wage stru c t u r e . The purpose of the whole exercise, / 3 J . D . Dunn and P.M. Rachel, Wage and Salary Administration, New York, Mc-Graw-Hill Book Co., 1971, p. 218. yd PLYWOOD INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION PROGRAM POINT - GRADE - RATE - CHART POE-7T5 GRADE RATE 0 - 81 1 base rate 82 - 91 2 base rate plus 4? 92 - 101 3 base rate plus 8* 102 - I l l 4 base rate plus 12* 11.2 - 121 5 base rate plus 16* 122 - 131 6 base rate plus 20* 132 - 141 7 base rate plus 25* 142 - 151 8 base rate plus 30* 152 - 161 9 base rate plus 35* 162 - 171 10 base rate plus 40* 172 - 181 11 base rate plus 45* 182 - 191 12 base rate plus 50* 192 - 201 13 base rate plus 55* 202 - 211 14 base rate plus 60* 212 - 221 15 base rate plus 65* 222 - 231 16 base rate plus 70* 232 - 241 17 base rate plus 75* 242 - 251 18 base rate plus 80* 252 - 2 6 1 19 base rate plus 85* 262 - 271 20 ba.se rate plus 90* 272 - 281 21 base rate plus 95* 282 - 291 22 base rate plus $1.00 292 - 301 23 base rate plus $1.05 302 - 311 24 base rate plus $1.10 312 - 321 25 base rate plus $1.15 s!« $ % % % # % >̂  # $ >;« % jfi , U.MGi- M:;i- 'M \XMY •. ,r.-.;|0: ; •./ '!""!""! M f t " ' .1 - i . . .1 .!.. i .1.. I .', I i i : I I : i " i" I' ! : ! ! . : • liij" r l : . ; ! i i ' ! ' i X i . ; i | i ilMiXi. J.I L Li..! S .!. LL.i.-i i-it I-! Lis J_.LLiJ. i i _! U- i I J_L jJ_u : ix .Lt~ > I <__ ; ' ~ J X 1 X L _ L 1 i .1 LL: .v-.. I I I I :Z X I X L L L J._LLLLLU-U J J - j . ' ' Xixl X T . ! J . _:J...Lj.J.i.L.i.. 1 ! M I M I ..I— ! i I i M J l j . J ! 1 ! I ) ! I I I -t—- t- J _ . | J _ I . _ ILLTL :tai!: H-h LL IJ ! i _L. I M X M X M X .L . i _ i I M .iXljX.i.T !-!• ! •j-'-!•-jJ - - JM...i..i..LLL: -i -)- J . i J _ L L U _ L l _L!_!J_LLL.L;.. • '< I i j'J . i I L U J Li L 1 U i i. U J - .' ' J . • _ t _ i t -LI.LJ J.. ML ..!...L..LjJ.;tiJ _l_L.L_i_LL LL! ' ' ' ! M M i l ! ! i .!..! ...LL L i .!..!..!. L I i I -rt" ..ULLLL.LL _LLiJ_U_L ...LLLLLU L i i -H-H-.. , , L iJ.LLLL i. L L L l J . i.XLU J J J _ L l L ' i i M i i i.JJ._l._lJ..J. i M I I M .._Lj._LLl_L.LL JJ._LLLI_!_L_[- i L p p u i j i u i i i ; _._L.._._._ |_j —j—,- _ ' _ L LI L' ' ' l_ _LLL.LXri.X.i J_U4 - L L . L - | X I L L L U X J X L J J _ J...L.L _L!_J_L _Ll_J-!_l_ .L.M..LL ! S I I I I I [ ! I [ "| j~j j" t~i" ! i ' i J_LLL.L„-.L.Li_LL DIM. L-t.. L.LLU 1 - ! - i - i - f - r r , . L J _ U . . . . . . L. .U. . .L. .! LJ_I_L_. U~ —i,—\—\~t- .1 U.J. i ; i i X i l . X J J JJ... J.J.XU..LJ ...Li. X i . j ! i Li-L JLJ,.l I, D-U-L ' ' L U J J J X - j ' T "!" i ..:._!_! _| . I i I I J . !...;.. ' i i i i MM r - m i " LI J J i l/l .! ._LL. i,|JJ...L (X- J._iJ- ' • M | i i j_Lp_L!XX _LLL , JJ I L L J _ J_L J_L -H-H- J_U_L _U_LLL I t ! I -M JLL ft-r-i- i ' _.L JJ_U J_ LLLLL H~l ! ! _Li-L i b t r l i J_!J_! J U i I i i i ' 1 X J_ J_ =_r.;_j..j...ĵ . J_I_j_J_J..j. .LLL ; i J !. • i i i - i' • 1 I I i : i i i ..... "" I r\'"\"' i :_ . . L _ L j J . . L . i - j j j ,j I, |. J._L. X X X J_ l_i_L JJ.j_L .!_. I 1LLL J_LL .J_L L.L-J J X ..LJJJ.J. X L .J_|.. X I - ..LL J_l_ L-M- JJ-L _ L J _ J_L r 1 1 1 u_ LUJ. ILL J_L -LL I-!- I J I P - L L |, j | j {-j L d i i j i j - 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • . • i i n i LLLL "MM J . . L LJ_L! I ' [ f i j t u # i t h — ! i n x J_L j j j _ J M L 1 ! i -LL i i i ' l i i ! I M M l t -LL -LLLL J I J I "JX ' i i i ' 1 " ! ! > ! I I I _J_i_iJJ_L •i ! i i i ; i i i • i il ' J 5 ! : ! j M X L m i T H ; ± L L L l L L l ± _ —I . . . . . . . . 1 L.U_LIJ...l_ JJJ..L|. M.L JJljJTl J1.U. IfH -!-'H-} T r r , . j _ l j ! _ i x l x _i_!_.L ui_L _L!-P_i_L L.;-|_i_;...|_y. 1' j-TTtri r i I ! I I I J_L.LLL!_Li_t however, i s to try and assess these components of f i n a l rates separately so that decisions are related, as far as possible, s p e c i f i c a l l y to d i f f e r e n t , separate issues: (1; job requirements, (2) d i f f e r e n t i a l s in rates, and (3) rocrparative "pick-up" rates. This emphasis on separ- ation of operations cannot be overemphasized. The enclosed graph and table represent a system of job classes which e x i s t in B.C.'s plywood industry today. Job classes have been defined as: ". . . a convenient grouping together of jobs of nearly the same d i f f i c u l t y and assigning one salary, or a range of s a l a r i e s , to a l l jobs in that p a r t i c u l a r salary grade. The jobs i n a p a r t i c u l a r s a l a r y group may be quite varied in nature. The only thing they must have in common i s that they be cons idered as being a l l about equal in s a l a r y v a l u e . " 2 5 Arguments i n favour of job classes centre on the following 27 issues : (1) Job classes represent an e f f i c i e n t system r e s u l t i n g from c a r e f u l management planning. Job groups can therefore be discussed and modified on a sound basis with wage survey and evaluation data. (2) Administrative and c l e r i c a l costs are r e - duced with respect to minimum and maximum wage rates due to job grouping. (3) Small rate d i f f e r e n t i a l s between jobs are eliminated. 2 6 I b i d . , p. 219. 2 7 I b i d . (4) Since employees tend to group jobs requiring s i m i l a r s k i l l s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s by compar- ing output, s k i l l , and other factors inherent in jobs, job grouping can serve to lessen resistance on the part of the employees to a consolidated wage and salary program. (5) Job grouping tends to reduce the numerous errors and inconsistencies which are bound to occur in the implementation of a job evaluation program. Unfortunately, there are problems and disadvantages associated with wage and salary plans b u i l t around the use of job classes (1) Often, i t is d i f f i c u l t to explain to the em- ployees' s a t i s f a c t i o n , a grouping of d i s s i m i l a r jobs that are paid approximately the same. The f a c t that d e f i n i t e point values are used to j u s t i f y job classes does not promote acceptance of job classes on the part of employees. The whole problem of employee education concerning job evaluation centres around being able to convince individuals that they, personally, w i l l gain not only by a wage increase but also in job s e c u r i t y . (2) Labour may oppose job classes i n favour of i n d i v i d u a l job r ates. The advantage to labour, in theory, i s that each job i s evaluated on i t s merits, and i s not grouped with other jobs for s a l a r y purposes, for s t r a t i f i c a t i o n purposes, or for manipula- t i o n by management. I f evaluation is not c o n s i s t e n t l y based on the merits of i n d i v - idual jobs, then the action is l i k e l y to cause trouble i f not now, then l a t e r . (3) Job classes may, in some circumstances, tend to r e s t r i c t or l i m i t management in i t s think- ing about, and approach to, incentive compens- ati o n matters. In order for compensation to motivate, management may want to reward employees for productivity, l o y a l t y , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , etc., on an i n d i v i d u a l b a s i s . Ibid., p. 220. However, t h i s need not be i l l o g i c a l as far as job evaluation i s concerned as long as in d i v i d u a l performance can be separately rewarded through incentive schemes and the l i k e which can act as a supplement to job evaluation in wage and salary administra- t i o n . There are no d e f i n i t e guides or standards to follow in determining the appropriate number of job classes for e f f i c i e n t operations. The best a l t e r n a t i v e to date has been to structure job classes on the basis of a thorough consideration of the p o l i c i e s of management, together with the natural groupings of jobs, and industry p r a c t i c e s . With these variables in mind, the f i r s t step i s to p l o t evaluation r e s u l t s and the present wage rate (see graph) of each job on a graph of weighted average wage rates and job point values, with a regression l i n e serving to e s t a b l i s h the mean of a l l job rates as they have presently been evaluated within i n d i v i d u a l firms. Two operations are then required to f i n a l i z e the wage s t r u c t u r e . 2 9 (1) The wage survey data must be compared with the firm's wage rate structure, and any preliminary adjustments or changes made as necessary. (2) The job cl a s s structure must then be f i t t e d to the firm's wage rate structure, and any discrepancies in i n d i v i d u a l job rates must be resolved before industry rates can be established. Ibid., p. 228. Discrepancies in i n d i v i d u a l job rates are commonly referred to as "red c i r c l e rates", i . e . , the jobs have wage rates outside the established job cl a s s s t r u c t u r e . Where the r e d - c i r c l e rate i s below the established job class structure, a common industry p r a c t i c e i s simply to increase the pay of the r e d - c i r c l e job to the minimum rate as j u s t i f i e d by the job c l a s s , as determined by the job evalua- t i o n process. While the employee suffers no s a l a r y l o s s , the p o t e n t i a l for that job i s reduced, and the r e l a t i v e value of the job to a l l other jobs i n the firm has been a l t e r e d . Where the r e d - c i r c l e rate i s above the job cl a s s structure, adjustment and implications are more complex. The usual p o l i c y and practice i s to guarantee that no job w i l l be reduced in pay as the r e s u l t of job evaluation and wage survey. This p o l i c y is a pre r e q u i s i t e i f job evalua- t i o n i s to win employee cooperation and acceptance. Management can avoid reducing wages and at the same time is not faced with an increase in the e x i s t i n g wage b i l l to the firm. In the plywood sector, red c i r c l e s above job c l a s s structure were much more prevalent than red c i r c l e s below, perhaps indicating a feature of supply shortage i n these jobs i n the past (10-12% estimated). However, pr o v i s i o n i s made that no i n d i v i d u a l s h a l l receive a lesser rate as a r e s u l t of evaluation. In a sense then, to incorporate as many of these discrepancies as possible, plywood evaluation resulted i n a "bastardized" wage curve (4C increments on 18 g r a d e s — not calculated on a percentage b a s i s ) . Although i t was a b i l a t e r a l decision to implement job evaluation in the p l y - wood secrcr, i t took from 1955 to 1958 to hammer out the d e r a i l s , and u n t i l 1959 to a c t u a l l y get the program mobile. The present r e l a t i o n s h i p i s e x p l i c i t l y defined i n Section 2 of A r t i c l e VII of the Master Agreement.3-*- The d i f f e r e n t i a l s between successive point groups are a l l four cents from groups one to s i x and f i v e cents from groups s i x on up to the highest (see point-grade-rate c h a r t ) . Group one i s pinned to the minimum rate for common labour as provided in A r t i c l e IX, Section 1 (currently $4,085 per hour). From the o r i g i n a l plan i n 1959, to the Nemetz r e v i s i o n in 1966, the plywood evaluation wage curve appeared to work very w e l l . However, in the late 1960*s, p a r t i a l l y as a r e s u l t of an economic recession, the I.W.A. c a l l e d for r e v i s i o n of the plan i n response to the union membership's expressed aim—a higher standard of l i v i n g . Justice Nemetz, i n 1970, r e f e r r e d the problem to Professor Wilkinson who wrote: "The kind of question to which the p a r t i e s wish to have an answer i s : — S h o u l d d i f f e r - e n t i a l s between groups be uniform or r e l a t i v e l y uniform as at present, or should they be percentages of the lower rate in each p a i r ? 3 0 L o r n e , Fingarsen, Interview with the writer, Nov. 18, 1972. 3 1F.I.R. and the I.W.A., Master Agreement 1970-71 - Forest Products Industries Coast Regiona B r i t i s h Columbia, June 15, 1970. Another s i m i l a r question would be: When wage increases are neogtiated, should they provide the same addi- t i o n a l amount of money for a l l groups or should they be percentages of the present rate?"32 Wilkinson worked on the problem for one year becs-cse he thought the questions raised were "too complex and too much involved with r e l a t i v e l y intangible values to be s e t t l e d within the time l i m i t s imposed on these hearings Wilkinson concluded that, "For quite a long time the p a r t i e s have negotiated across-the-board, equal money increases rather than percentage increases. This has occurred not just in the plywood industry but in logging and sawmilling as w e l l . The inevitable r e s u l t has been to reduce the money value of high-level -jobs r e l a t i v e to that of low-level jobs."-* 4 He continued, "I do not find that, on the whole, the higher grade jobs i n the Plywood Industry have suffered more in t h i s respect than those in the other segments of the f o r e s t industry. Comparisons with jobs outside the plywood evaluation plan are hazardous because few maintain the same requirements and working conditions over an extended period. Also, some external jobs have been b e n e f i c i a r i e s of s p e c i a l negotiating pres- sures and have achieved r e l a t i v e l y greater gains, sometimes at the expense of equity. Since the Plywood Industry and i t s Job Evaluation Plan must e x i s t within the larger framework of the Forest Industry as a whole, i t seems important that the p o l i c y for e s t a b l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t i a l s 32wiikinson, Report, p. 34. 33N.T. Nemetz to L.R. Peterson (then Minister of Report on 1970 Woodworkers Dispute, Vancouver, . 7 , 1970. - " i l k i n s o n , Report, p. 34. between groups be e s s e n t i a l l y the same v as t h a t which governs d i f f e r e n t i a l s between jobs of d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s i n logging and sawmilling. Therefore, i t appears to the writer that Wilkinson dob: l i t t l e to move the plywood wage curve away from i t s exisohog operational scheme. Like many plans before i t , the plywood wage plan was adjusted only s l i g h t l y so that i t did not move " o u t - o f - k i l t e r " with h i s t o r i c a l wage patterns which existed not only in the plywood sector but in the en t i r e B.C. fo r e s t industry. Wilkinson did make one con- cession though : "In periods when across-the-board money increases are being negotiated f o r other segments of the industry, percentage increases f o r plywood would produce troublesome external comparisons, and vice versa. Neither pattern i s necessar- i l y always more equitable than the other although, i n the long run, the percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l and percentage increase are more defensible. Which i s favoured in negotiations by one party or the other i s not so much a matter of equity as i t i s of group economics and p o l i t i c s . " 3 , 3 The f e e l i n g at present i s that the union's i n s i s - tence on percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l s , as opposed to step-by- step increments, could be rewarded during the next contract negotiations. F a i l i n g that, i t i s u n l i k e l y that percentage increases w i l l be effected unless the Coast sawmills accept 35 Ibid., pp. 34-35. 3 5 I b i d . , p. 35. percentage increments, i f and when a job e v a l u a t i o n scheme i s i n s t a l l e d . This would e s t a b l i s h a s i g n i f i c a n t precedent which vould then pave the way f o r percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l s to be implemented i n plywood job e v a l u a t i o n . CHAPTER VI PLYWOOD EVALUATION: ANALYSIS The plywood evaluation represents the only plan i n e f f e c t i n B.C.'s forest industry from which the question, "Is job evaluation worthwhile as a technique i n labour- management r e l a t i o n s ? " may be evaluated. This i s because plywood evaluation has been operational for over t h i r t e e n years, as opposed to the only other plan, the Southern I n t e r i o r sawmill evaluation, which has only been in e f f e c t f o r two years. There are a number of considerations to be examined i n answering the question. The f i r s t of these i s the p a r t i c u l a r nature of the fo r e s t industry, not only i n B.C. but a l s o in the United States. The lumber and p l y - wood industry i s highly competitive, including a few very large, integrated firms and a great number of medium and small firms producing only lumber. Lumber and plywood manufacture i s competitive in the textbook sense of having a large number of s e l l e r s and a homogeneous product. The industry i s not evenly d i s t r i b u t e d geographically, rather 37 i t i s concentrated near the sources of timber. 3 7J.A. Smith, The Structure of Wages in the P a c i f i c North-West Lumber Industry, Ph.D. Thesis, Washington State University, 1967, p. 1. The h i s t o r y of labour r e l a t i o n s in the western lumber industry is dominated by animosity and s t r i f e between the workers and the employers, between the workers and the union, and between the union and the employers, de t e r i o r a t i n g into armed confrontations on occasions. U n t i l -he 1930's the workers were unable to e s t a b l i s h e f f e c t i v e unions i n the industry, p a r t l y because of employer resistance, but mostly because of the unstable nature of employment i n the forest industry. Loggers were p a r t i c u l - a r l y mobile since the majority were single and l i v e d i n logging camps when working. They responded to unsatis- factory working conditions by "dragging-up" for a new l o c a t i o n and a new employer. The I n d u s t r i a l Workers of the World (I.W.W.), a prototype union, claimed many members among the loggers, but t h i s somewhat r a d i c a l union was not disposed to negotiate contracts and engage i n continuous labour r e l a t i o n s with employers. Their philosophy, "Strike and move on", was consistent with the nomadic 38 existence of the loggers. This legacy of i n d u s t r i a l warfare i n the f o r e s t industry made the task of organizing to meet the needs of a war economy (World War II) p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t . In World War I, the U.S. federal government had sponsored the "Spruce Brigade" and the "Loyal Legion of Loggers and Ibid., pp. 2-3. Lumbermen" in an attempt to meet the c r i s i s in lumber production. These measures proved inadequate as p a t r i o t i c fervour expired and demand for lumber increased. The period between the Wars was marked by p e r i o d i c outbursts o f violence. The I.W.W. a c t i v e l y organized lumber workers. The -workers were successful in e s t a b l i s h i n g a union in 1935 which a f f i l i a t e d with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America. However, the carpenters assumed a d i c t a t o r i a l a ttitude toward t h e i r new a f f i l i a t e s and dissension within the new union grew into outright r e b e l l i o n . Dissidents broke with the carpenter dominated organization, the Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, and formed the International Woodworkers of America (I.W.A.), chartered in 1937 by the Congress of I n d u s t r i a l Organiza- t i o n (C.I.O). A new era of i n d u s t r i a l s t r i f e was pre- c i p i t a t e d as the two unions " a c t i v e l y " competed for the l o y a l t y of workers, expending much of t h e i r energy i n struggles with each other rather than i n improving condi- tions for e x i s t i n g members and extending the organization 39 among the unorganized. Employer attitudes throughout the P a c i f i c North- west toward union organization were uniformly h o s t i l e . The employers used the s p l i t in ranks of the workers to stave o f f unionization for a time, e n l i s t i n g the a i d of c i v i c groups and the p o l i c e to f r u s t r a t e organizing d r i v e s . 3 9 I b i d . , p. 3. The f i r s t president was Harold P r i t c h e t t (1937- 1940) from Vancouver, B.C. Under his leadership, and that of Nigel Morgan (l a t e r to become Chairman of the Labour Progressive Party), the I.W.A. attracted a su b s t a n t i a l fellowing in B.C. An intensive organizational campaign was oooscituted and, as a r e s u l t , the f i r s t contract was signed with independent employers in B.C. to provide union recognition and improved working conditions. In November, 1943, a f i r s t general contract was negotiated covering the greater part of the coastal industry ,4<~) The war years proved d i f f i c u l t , with the demand for f o r est workers well in excess of supply. Tactics changed from the submission of petty grievances and complaints to those of broad and advanced bargaining. In 1946, the union demanded of R.V. Stuart Research Ltd., an organization speaking for 147 employers, a contract granting a forty-hour work week, 25 <: an hour increase in pay, and the union shop and voluntary check-off. Chief Ju s t i c e Sloan was appointed as a mediator by the govern- ment, but f a i l e d to e f f e c t a settlement, and a s t r i k e was c a l l e d on May 15, 1946, involving 37,000 workers and over 20% of the province's p a y r o l l . A settlement was f i n a l l y 4 0H.A. Logan, Trade Unions i n Canada, Toronto, The MacMillan Co., 1948, p. 284. arrived at on the basis of a 44-hour week, a general increase of 15C an hour and the voluntary irrevocable check-off. The s t r i k e involved a loss in wages of S8 m i l l i o n or $261 for each worker, and i n terms of product, 300 m i l l i o n 41 board feet. Thus was ended a s t r i k e said to be the most expensive in B.C.'s hist o r y to that time, excepting the coal s t r i k e on Vancouver Island in 1912-1914. From that settlement emerged the true nature of labour r e l a t i o n s and c o l l e c t i v e bargaining which has plagued the I.W.A. and the employers to the present day. General bad feelings existed on both sides for the next decade. Undoubtedly, the lumber industry of B.C. has accounted for a disproportionate share of i n d u s t r i a l s t r i f e in the province. During the decade 1949-59, the industry accounted for about 10% of the paid labour force in B.C.; but, i t also accounted for about 20% of a l l s t r i k e s , almost one-half of a l l s t r i k e p a r t i c i p a n t s and two-thirds of a l l man-days l o s t in s t r i k e s . The two large and pro- tracted s t r i k e s of 1952 and 1959 alone accounted for more days l o s t than the t o t a l for a l l other s t r i k e s in a l l other industries in the province during the decade. 4 2 This disproportionate number of s t r i k e p a r t i c i - pants and days l o s t in the industry may be att r i b u t e d to 4 1 I b i d . 4 2 S . Jamieson, "Multi-Employer Bargaining. The Case of B.C. Coast Lumber Industry", Relations I n d u s t r i e l l e s , Vol. 26, No. 1, January, 1971, p. 150. a few large " i n t e r e s t " disputes that were subject to l e g a l l y required c o n c i l i a t i o n procedures in the negotia- t i o n of new agreements. 4 3 The industry did not experience any such large or protracted shutdowns during the 1960's. However, coast lurher did experience a large number of i l l e g a l , w i l dcat s t r i k e s , which far outnumbered the authorized s t r i k e s (see tab l e ) , reaching, a peak of 21 i n 1969. 4 4 The only threat to an industry-wide shutdown occurred i n 1966 and involved more than 6000 workers. However, Nemetz was able to impose a sizeable wage settlement on the industry which served to avert a s t r i k e . Several "minor" s t r i k e s occurred u n t i l 1959 when the I.W.A. conducted one of the major s t r i k e s of the postwar years. "It l a s t e d from July to September, involved 30,000 loggers working for 134 companies, and ended a f t e r 66 days with a settlement providing for a 10£ wage increase in 1959 and a further 10C increase in I960." 4 5 Surprisingly, a period of 13 years passed before the I.W.A. conducted t h e i r most recent general s t r i k e i n July, 1972. The s t r i k e l a s t e d some two weeks and provided general wage increases o f 36%C i n 43ibid. 4 4 i b i d . 4 5 C h a r l e s Lipton, The Trade Union Movement of Canada 1827-1959, Montreal, Canadian S o c i a l Pub. Ltd., 1966, pp. 315- 316. STRIKES IK THE COAST LUMBER INDUSTRY IN B.C. 1949-1969 AUTHORIZED UNAUTHORIZED Year No. Man-Days L o s t ^ No. Man-Days Lost Total 1949 0 1950 0 — 6 4,977 4,977 1951 1 90 2 312 402 1952 1 1,035,000 2 158 1,035,158 1953 0 — 2 1,850 1,850 1954 0 — 2 945 945 1955 2 1,002 5 1,355 2,357 1956 1 1,665 2 5,667 7,332 1957 0 — — — — 1958 0 — 6 2,757 2,757 1959 2 1,233,950 1 1,125 1,235,075 1960 0 — 1 1,128 1,128 1961 0 — 1 42 42 1962 3 373 3 9,262 9,635 1963 1 2,163 1 37 2,200 1964 1 432 2 305 737 1965 0 — 2 1,140 1,140 1966 1 86,520 4 1,849 88,369 1967 0 — 7 7,211 7,211 1968 3 6,803 11 19,589 26,392 1969 1 2,196 21 15,553 17,749 Man-Days l o s t include only unions involved d i r e c t l y i n s t r i k e s or lock-outs. This figure takes no account for other workers who may have refused to cross picket l i n e s or f o r other reasons become unemployed because of s t r i k e s . Source: B.C. Department of Labour, Annual Reports, c i t e d in S. Jamieson, "Multi-Employer Bargaining: The Case of B.C. Coast Lumber Industry", Rel=-ions I n d u s t r i e l l e s , Vol. 26, No. 1, Januarv, 15~1, p. 151. each year of a two year contract extending through to 1974. 4 6 The period of r e l a t i v e calm from 1959-1972 coincided with two s i g n i f i c a n t events: (1) the tenure (11 years11' of Jack Moore as President, I.W.A. Regional Council So. 1, and (2) the l i f e - s p a n of the Plywood Job Evaluation Plan. The s t r i k e in 1959 provided the impetus necessary to a c t u a l l y implement the plan a f t e r four years of'haranguing and argument between management and the union. Its success since that time is exemplified by the f a c t that "no dispute time has been l o s t due to loss of 47 i n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s . " However, "grievance procedure" and the handling of i n d i v i d u a l evaluation and re-evaluation has proven troublesome, perhaps indicating that the plan should be rewritten to incorporate remedies for these i l l s . In the o v e r a l l perspective though. Plywood Evalua- t i o n has been enormously su c c e s s f u l . I t might be worth- while to consider some of the reasons for that success at t h i s juncture. The f i r s t c r i t e r i a which must be s a t i s f i e d i s that of expense, neither side w i l l f i n d evaluation accept- able i f the costs exceed the b e n e f i t s . In 1955, Dr. Hewson, 4 6 L e l a n d J . Luckhurst, The I.W.A.-F.I.R. Settlement, 1972, U.B.C., Vancouver, 1972. 4^Lorne Fingarson, Interview with the writer, Nov. 12. 1972. the designer for Stevenson & Kellogg, put together the plywood plan for approximately $20,000. The four year i n s t a l l a t i o n period to implement the plan in 11 plants cost i n the v i c i n i t y of $60,000 for a t o t a l i n s t a l l a t i o n cost of $80,000. 4 8 Administration of the plan has run in the v i c i n i t y of $60,000-$70,000 per year on average. The Plywood Evaluation Committee, composed of men from the I.W.A. and F.I.R., i s responsible for the smooth operation of the plan. Each side bears i t s own costs for s a l a r i e s , c l e r i c a l work, e t c . but i t i s suspected that management bears the majority of such costs, since F.I.R. and the I n d u s t r i a l Relations departments of the various f o r e s t companies are constantly involved with the plan. S p e c i f i c figures are unavailable because no one in the industry works on evaluation f u l l time. A t y p i c a l company budget, expressed as a percentage of 4 9 the t o t a l I.R. budget, runs from 1 to 10 depending on how busy the p a r t i c u l a r company is with evaluation at any one time. Management f e l t that i f plywood evaluation . could be implemented and administered at an average cost of 5C/man/hour, then evaluation would be a v;r-±- while aid to c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. Further ciscussicr. 4 8 Lome Fingarson, Interview with the writer, Feb. 1 9 , 1 9 7 3 . 4 ^ Marc Close, Interview with the writer, Feb. 8, 1 9 7 3 . of the mechanics of t h i s a r b i t r a r y figure w i l l be deferred to the section where Southern I n t e r i o r sawmill evaluation i s covered as better and more comprehensive information is a v a i l a b l e in that area. Most important, however, i s the concensus by both management and union that job evalua- t i o n i s worthwhile on a cost-benefit b a s i s . 5 ^ A second important factor has been the success- f u l functioning of the Plywood Evaluation Committee. Labour and t e c h n i c a l problems have been c o n s i s t e n t l y resolved within the committee structure, and when further d i f f i c u l t i e s have arisen, the p a r t i e s have obtained outside assistance from impartial s p e c i a l i s t s i n the f i e l d l i k e Stevenson & Kellogg, P a c i f i c North West Consultants Ltd., and others. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , provision made for the involvement of union l o c a l business agents and l o c a l plant management with respect to determining the facts r e l a t i v e to job content and e s t a b l i s h i n g the need for re-evaluation, has been a major contribution to the committee. "There i s no doubt that job evaluation plans must be adjusted p e r i o d i c a l l y , but i n making such changes, 51 the i n t e g r i t y of the plan i t s e l f must be mainttiaec. = 50Wyman Trineer, Interview with the writer, Feb. 22, 1973. "^N.T. Nemetz, Letter to Professor Hugh Wilkinson, Nov. 30, 1970. Plywood evaluation incorporates such a p r o v i s i o n . Professor Wilkinson re-defined the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for re-evaluation in his 1971 r e p o r t : "When new c r i t e r i a and point weightings are established, there is a considerable amount of work to be done i n re-evaluating a l l the jobs in the industry before the new scheme can r e a l l y be put into e f f e c t . Because t h i s must be done quickly there is more than the usual opportunity for inconsistencies to develop, unless the work i s always done by the same people . . . Because of the experience they have gained in t h i s work, producing bench- mark jobs for new factors and degrees, r e - r a t i n g whole plants according to the new c r i t e r i a , I would suggest that Mr. Lorne Fingarson (I.W.A. representative) and Mr. Frank Paul (F.I.R. representative) be asked to revise the ratings of a l l jobs in the remaining p l a n t s . " 5 2 This re-evaluation was completed in 1972 providing a complete overhaul of the plywood evaluation plan. Similar, but less exhaustive, r e v i s i o n s were a l s o made in 1963, 1966, and 1969. Job evaluation has a widespread acceptance as a management and union t o o l for improving i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s . In plywood or any other industry, the state of these r e l a - t i ons i s a measure of the workers' s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r jobs. Two generally recognized sources of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n among labour are the wage l e v e l and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between incomes of one worker and another. The l a t c e r is the primary concern of plywood job evaluation. Because b^Hugh Wilkinson, "Plywood Job Evaluation", A Report Prepared for the I.W.A. and F.I.R., August 1, 1S71, p. 33. defensible wage rates can be a r r i v e d at on a l o g i c a l basis, or because d i f f e r e n t i a l s in wage rates can be determined on an acceptable comparative basis, union = -d management have a f a c t u a l rather than a r i b t r a r y basis for c o l l e c t i v e bargaining and this eliminates constant r e - negoco.=.cing of wage rates. In addition, job evaluation eliminates personal favouritism and a s s i s t s management in maintaining a p o s i t i o n i n the labour market and i n conform- ing to industry and community wage r a t e s . 5 3 Though these comments are of a more general nature, they are very applicable to i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s within B.C.'s plywood industry since 1959. There are numerous secondary benefits which job evaluation has provided for the plywood industry, i n c l u d i n g : (1) a plan to encompass changes in the production process as automation and technology increase; (2) industry standardization of jobs, work pra c t i c e s ; (3) a means to measure production flow and recovery—important to management; (4) the basis for job description, t r a i n i n g programs, supplementary research. Many of these topics w i l l surface again in examination of sawmill evaluation. At t h i s point, the John Houston, Job Evaluation Seminar, May 1972, w r i t e r b e l i e v e s i t i s reasonable t o conclude t h a t job e v a l u a t i o n has indeed proven a worthwhile technique i n labour management r e l a t i o n s . I would q u a l i f y t h a t by adding plywood represents only one experience w i t h e v a l u a t i o n and t h a t i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a study of sa w m i l l e v a l u a t i o n , a more comprehensive and representa t i v e c o n c l u s i o n w i l l be reached. CHAPTER VII SAWMILLING IN B.C. - PRESENT STATUS As a prelude to the introduction of job evalu- ation in the sawmilling sector of the forest industry i n B.C., i t i s appropriate to examine "the state of the a r t " to try and understand the numerous and diverse forces to which job evaluation has attempted to respond in the Southern I n t e r i o r . A d e t a i l e d report on the industry was published by the B.C. government's Department of I n d u s t r i a l Develop- ment, Trade, and Commerce in which David Cartwright of the Economics and S t a t i s t i c s Branch interpreted events in the industry to 1971. A review of Cartwright*s report i n the B r i t i s h Columbia Lumberman1 provides the basis for t h i s section of the d i s s e r t a t i o n . Cartwright's study i s supplemented by a number of tables compiled by Ralph D. Scott, Research Economist, IWA (Portland, Ore.), 2 which follow at the end of t h i s chapter. ^•"Government Report Reveals Sawmill's Past anf Future," reviewed in B r i t i s h Columbia Lumberman, Vol . 5 7 , No. 1, January, 1973, pp. 31-32. ^Ralph n. Scott, "Technological Change in the E r i t i s h Columbia Forest Products Industry," Speech d e l i v - ered t o : I.R.M.A. Convention, Harrison Hot Springs, B.C., February 22, 1973. PRODUCTION OF MAJOR FOREST INDUSTRIES 1971 ACTUAL AND 1975, 1985 FORECAST Product Units 1971 Actual 1975 1985 Forecast {% increase) Lumber M i l l i o n f.b.m. 8,970.4 10,000 (11.5) 13,200 (32) Plywood M i l l i o n Sq. Ft. (3/8") 1.873.6 2,200 (14.8) 3,000 (26.7) A l l Wood Pulp Thousand Tons 4,767.5 5,800 (17.8) 8,000 (27.5) Kraft pulp Thousand Tons 3,276.6 4, 000 (18.1) 5,400 (25.9) Other Thousand Tons 1,490.9 1,800 (17.2) 2, 600 (30.8) A l l Paper & Paperboard Thousand Tons 1,910.4 *1,300 ! (-47.0) 3,100 (58.1) Newsprint Thousand Tons 1,393.6 1.600 (12.9) 2,050 (22.0) Other Thousand Tons 516.8 700 (26.2) 1,050 (33.3) Source; B r i t i s h Columbia Lumberman, January 1973. Possibly the most important problem f ar ico one sawmilling industry today i s increasing costs. B.C.'s for e s t industry i s faced with the need to remain competi- t i v e in world markets and is therefore not necessarily able to pass on increased costs. Strong competition from substitute products could displace lumber in some of i t s t r a d i t i o n a l markets i f the p r i c e of lumber continues to increase r e l a t i v e l y faster than the p r i c e o f competing products. The industry continues to expand ra p i d l y , with the majority of the development taking place i n the I n t e r i o r Region. The trend towards more intensive u t i l i z a t i o n of the timber resource has alp ready begun and the future w i l l continue to witness i t s development. Increased u t i l i z a t i o n of small timber w i l l occur, while species such as balsam, hemlock and hardwoods, (which to date have been generally considered to be of lower economic value), w i l l a l s o enjoy greater 3 demand. There i s room for development in the sawmill industry i f substantial amounts of c a p i t a l can be located. Prospective investors w i l l generally locate in the northern portions of the province for thac i s the area which retains the greatest p o t e n t i a l f o r saw- 3"Government Sawmill Report," p. 31. m i l l i n g development. Capital and repair expenditure in the saw and planing m i l l industry (so-called because S t a t i s t i c s Canada uses that terminology) increased from $41.6 m i l l i o n i n 1961 to $115.8 m i l l i o n in 1970. Of t h i s , a 183 per cent increase i n sawmill and planing m i l l expenditure between 1968 and 1969 consisted bas- i c a l l y of large c a p i t a l outlays i n both new m i l l s and new machinery. When the industry began adapting to allow handling of large volumes of small logs r e s u l t i n g from implementation of close u t i l i z a t i o n p o l i c i e s required by government, wholesale changes in the scale of operations occurred. Since the p o l i c y is not expected to change d r a s t i c a l l y and m i l l s are s t i l l adapting to the new s i t u a t i o n , c a p i t a l and repair expenditure is l i k e l y to remain at current l e v e l s in the immediate f u t u r e . 4 One of the most important changes i n the saw and planing m i l l industry is the trend towards m i l l s capable of economically proces- sing small diametered inventory. This can be accomplished by sawing a large number of logs, quickly and e f f i c i e n t l y . The implications of t h i s trend for job evaluation are tremendous, as w i l l be discussed l a t e r when a stuf-j of factors, degrees, e t c . i s undertaken. 4 I b i d . In the future, i t is expected that the 3.Z. saw and planing m i l l industry w i l l continue to develop, implementing sophisticated means to maximize p r o f i t s . Present day sawing techniques and practices w i l l be improved and modernized while automation c o n t i n u e s — e s p e c i a l l y i n the labour intensive operations. Use of equipment l i k e computers, laser beams, and high speed water jets are becoming accepted components for future sawmills. Substitute products have replaced wood in many instances because of wood's disadvantages: (1) Random occurrence of natural defects (2) non-isoptropic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (3) dimensional i n s t a b i l i t y under d i f f e r e n t moisture conditions (4) high cost (of wood) (5) substitutes have been aggressively marketed. Manufacturers of substitute goods have c a p i t a l - ized on t h e i r products' c a p a b i l i t i e s and placed emphasis on long-term and in-place maintenance costs rather than i n i t i a l material cost. Therefore, to maintain t h e i r markets, lumber manufacturers are implementing aggressive marketing programs and attempting to become more consumer orientated. Developments required include new techniques emphasizing the more e f f i c i e n t use of wood c o n s t r u c t i o n 5 I b i d . , pp. 31-32. and a d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n of e x i s t i n g product l i n e s . The manufacture of prefinished units i n l i e u of i n d i v i d u a l products w i l l provide higher returns on investment i f f u l l u t i l i z a t i o n of technical and engineering knowledge that has only been p a r t i a l l y u t i l i z e d to date in the sawmilling industry can be eff e c t e d . In recent years, many of the smaller sawmills' timber quotas have been consolidated allowing the establishment of a few large sawmilling complexes. The process has led many manufacturers to integrate "forward", toward the ultimate user, with the e s t a b l i s h - ment of manufacturer-owned wholesale and/or dealer out- l e t s , a trend which i s expected to continue in the future. A current example is the expansion of Crown Zellerbach Stores Ltd. into d o - i t - y o u r s e l f r e t a i l i n g . I t i s expected that the United States w i l l r e t a i n i t s p o s i t i o n as the p r i n c i p a l importer of B.C. lumber, s p e c i f i c a l l y dimension, or "two inch", thickness lumber of s t r u c t u r a l q u a l i t y . The implications of thi s demand w i l l continue to r e f l e c t advanced technological requirements, making job evaluation even more c r i t i c a l in e s t a b l i s h i n g new wage c r i t e r i a . In depth stuci=~ of the United States' demand for timber products p-cint cc~ 6 I b i d . , p. 32. that the need for such goods w i l l increase substa-- i=lly over the next several decades (1971 U.S. lumber imports from Canada t o t a l l e d 7.1 b i l l i o n board feet, 77.7 per 7 cent of which came from B.C.). The advantages are not so apparent in B.C.'s other market areas. Japan imports softwood lumber mainly from Canada, the U.S., and the U.S.S.R. Over h a l f of Japan's 1970 imports of t h i s commodity were from B.C., though the U.S.S.R. could provide stronger competition i n the near futute. During 1972-73, Japan experienced a severe housing shortage causing heavy speculation among Japanese lumber buyers in B.C., mainly i n cypress (yellow cedar) . This demand i s expected to ease o f f to normal l e v e l s by the end of 1973. During 1970, the United Kingdom imported softwood lumber from a number o f countries, of which Sweden, the U.S.S.R., Finland, Canada, and Poland were the most important. Approx- imately 90 per cent of Canada's lumber exports to the United Kingdom were manufactured in B.C., but strong marketing programs w i l l have to be maintained i f B.C. i s expected to r e t a i n any of i t s share of t h i s dirrir_ish- ing market. a Senate Review Committee t r a v e l l e d to ' i b i d . 8 I b i d . Europe in mid-March, 1973, to assess the e f f e c t of the entry of the United Kingdom into the European Economic Community. The r e s u l t s of that t r i p are unpublished to date. However, i t i s safe to speculate that B.C.'s p o s i t i o n w i l l not be undermined too s e r i o u s l y as current E.E.C. countries are not major s u p p l i e r s . Not withstanding the problems of automation, c o n s t r i c t i n g foreign markets, and heavier r e l i a n c e on the U.S. A t l a n t i c Seaboard market, the sawmilling industry i s expected to maintain i t s dominant r o l e in the forest i n d u s t r i e s . Continued a p p l i c a t i o n of inten- s i v e f o r e s t management practices and an increase in log production ( d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between logs and round- wood production to saw and planing m i l l operations) can be expected. Forecasts indicate that the forest based industries of B.C. w i l l require 2.3 b i l l i o n cubic feet o f roundwood in 1975, increasing to 2.9 b i l l i o n cubic feet by 1985. Since under present standards of f o r e s t management 3.4 b i l l i o n cubic feet of timber can be cut annually, there appears to be ample raw material to supply the f o r e s t industry in 1985. At that time the industry is expected to produce 13.2 b i l l i o n board f e e t of lumber, 3 b i l l i o n square feet (3/8") of plyvc-oc, 8 m i l l i o n tons of a l l wood pulp, and 3.1 m i l l i o n tons of a l l paper and paperboard 9 (see table following). 9 I b i d . Capital Investment for Machinery and Equipment Per Employee in the Wood-Manufacturing Industry, 1963-71 British Columbia Investment for Mach. £ Equip. Investment for Mach. £ Equip. Machinery £ Investment Machinery £ Investment Equipment Pur Employee Year Employment • Equipment Per Employee (1963 dollars) (V.n'.:i dollars) 1963 35,300 $23,100,000 $ 654 $23,100,000 $ 654 1964 35,700 25,500,000 714 24,500,000 684 1965 36,900 32,900,000 892 30,400,000 823 1966 37,300 24,000,000 643 21,500,000 576 1967 34,900 21,800,000 625 19,700,000 564 1968 35,200 22,500,000 4 639 20,300,000 576 1969 37,500 59,600,000 .1589 52,400,000 1,397 1970 36,600 56,900,000 1555 47,800,000 1,306 1971 40,000 71,800,000 1795 58,500,000 1,462 Sources: Private and Public Investment in Canada, Statistics Canada and Department of Industry,'Trade and Commerce, 61-205. Review of Employment and Average Weekly Wages and Salaries, DBS, 72-201 Prices and Price Indexes, Statistics Canada, 62-002, (Implicit Price Index for Machinery and Equipment, gross fixed capital formation) Capital Investment for Machinery and Equipment Per Employee in the Wood-Manufacturing Industry, 1963-71 Canada Investment for Mach. £ Equip. Investment for Mach. £ Equip. Machinery £ Investment Machinery £ Investment Equipment Per Employee Year Employment Equipment Per Employee (1963 dollars) (1963 dollars) 1963 75,800 $ 38,000,000 $ 501 $38,000,000 $ 501 1964 78,500 45,500,000 580 43,700,000 556 1965 80,100 49,500,000 618 45,800,000 571 1966 79,800 48,900,000 613 43,800,000 548 1967 76,400 48,200,000 631 43,500,000 569 1968 76,500 52,600,000 688 47,500,000 620 1969 79,800 95,200,000 1,193 83,600,000 1,047 1970 76,300 101,500,000 1,330 85,200,000 1,116 1971 82,300 112,900,000 1,372 92,000,000 1,117 Sources: Private and Public Investment in Canada, Statistics Canada and Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, 61-205. Review of Employment and Average Weekly Wages and .'">n"l aries, DBS, 72-201 I ' p l i ' i'ii and Price Indexes, Statistics Canada, 62-002, ( im|• t ip.vl; Price Index for Machinery and Equipment, gross .1 h i n i l capital formation) RDS: J:f ON 65 Estimates of Primary Forest Production, 1963-71 (100 solid cubic feet) Year British Columbia Change from Previous Year Canada Change from Previous Year 1963 14,734,230 __ 35,230,100 1964 15,145,950 + 2.8% 36,269,850 + 2.9% 1965 15,331,130 + 1.2 36,606,690 + 0.9 1966 10,024,370 ( - + 4.5 38,490,190 + 5.1 1967 15,725,990- - 1.9 37,984^460 - .1.3 1968 17,024,550 + 8.2 39,726,310 + 4.6 1969 18,900,520 +11.0 43,039,560 + 8.3 1970 19,326,280 + 2.2 42,878,900 - 0.4 1971 19,970,810 + 3.3 N/A Average Annual Change +3.9% +2.9% Source: Canadian Forestry Statistics, 1970 Statistics Canada, 25-202, p. 11. Annual Report 1971, British Columbia Forest Service, p. 88. 66 Lumber Production, 1963-71 (thousands of board feet) British Change from Change from Year Columbia Previous Year Canada Previous Year 1963 6,734,071 __ 9,877,326 1964 7,095,282 + 5.4% 10,355,703 + 4.8% 1965 7,449,485 + 5.0 10,815,355 + 4.4 1966 7,319,108 - 1.7 10,599,475 - 2.0 1967 7,109,794 - 2.8 10,329,425 - 2.5 1968 7,811,139 + 9.9 11,351,449 + 9.9 1969 7,695,606 - 1.5 11,538,269 + 1.6 1970 7,763,500 + 0.9 11,301,260 - 2.0 1971 8,970,400 +15.5 12,777,903 +13.1 Average Annual Change +3.8% +3.4% Source: The Sawmill Industry of British Columbia, Government of the Province of British Columbia, October 1972, p. 64. 67 Logging r-vployment, 1963-71 Production Workers Year British Columbia Change from Previous Year Canada Change from Previous Year 1963 15,604 53,921 1961+ 15,936 + 2.1% 55,882 + 3.6% 1965 16,299 + 2.3 53,992 - 3.4 1966 15,329 - 5.9 54,317 + 0.6 1967 14,846 - 3.1 51,004 - 6.1 1968 15,265 + 2.8 45,187 - 11.4 1969 17,241 + 12.9 46,847 + 3.7 1970 15,884 - 7.9 44,814 - 4.3 1971 N/A N/A Average Annual Change + 0.5% — 2.5% Source: Canada Forestry Statistics, 1970, Statistics Canada, 25-202, p. 10. Wood Products Manufacturing Employment, 1963-71 Year British Columbia Change from Previous Year Canada Change from Previous Year 1963 35,300 „ 75,800 „ 1964 35,700 + 1.1% 78,500 + 3.6% 1965 36,900 + 3.4 80,100 + 2.0 1966 37,300 + 1.1 79,800 - 0.4 1967 34,900 - 6.4 76,400 + 4.3 1968 35,200 + 0.8 76,500 + 0.1 1969 37,500 + 6.5 79,800 + 4.3 1970 36,600 - 2.4 76,300 - 4.4 1971 40,000 + 9.3 82,300 + 7.9 Average Annual Change +1.7% +2.2% Source: Review of Employment and Average Weekly Wages and Salaries, DBS, 72-201. 69 With t h i s background i n mind, attention ray- now be focused on job evaluation as i t has been applied in the sawmills of the Southern I n t e r i o r . CHAPTER VIII SOUTHERN INTERIOR SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION: HISTORY At the urging of Wyman Trineer, 2nd Vice- President of I.W.A. Regional Council No. 1, a study was commissioned i n 1967 to determine the f e a s i b i l i t y of implementing a job evaluation program in I n t e r i o r saw- m i l l s . Subsequently, P a c i f i c North West Consultants Ltd., (Lome A. Fingarson, Managing Director) were retained to design and i n s t a l l the program. The i n i t i a l r eport submitted by Fingarson examined the o v e r a l l operations of I n t e r i o r sawmills, but established no benchmarks fo r e i t h e r jobs or plants. Management was sympathetic towards such a plan i f the promise of wage d i s c i p l i n e at a reasonable p r i c e was found to be p r a c t i c a l . 1 ^ The approach taken was to use three interview teams comprising one union member and one company member per team. The job of these teams was to complete a JOB STUDY RECORD, which was a type of questionnaire i r . - r i v i n g completion of the front page with management, than a -.rb l u L o r n e Fingarson, interview with the writer, March' 1, 1973. interview with an incumbent selected for each job. c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Upon completion of the study record, management was given the opportunity to comment on the statements made by the incumbent. Union and management were i n agreement that management should have the l a s t word with respect to the job study record. This resulted in a completely reconciled job study record being f o r - warded to two evaluators, one from each side, for f i n a l grading and r a t i n g . ^ I n i t i a l l y progress was slow but i t was proved that as the interviewers become more experienced, a team of two men could complete 40-50 job study records i n approximately 8-10 days. For instance, a medium size d m i l l has about 25 production c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , in which case the interviewers would be out of that operation within 5 days. Interviews were generally conducted on s h i f t time and i f a man could only be interviewed on night s h i f t , then he was brought i n 30 minutes early, and i n s p e c i a l circumstances the interview was conducted at night. An interview normally took about 20 minutes— 12 c e r t a i n l y no more than 30 minutes. Since, in the Southern I n t e r i o r , job t i t lei- were reasonably standard due to the close w o r k i n g •^John Houston, Sawmill Job E v a l u a t i o n Seminar, May, 1972, p. 7. 1 2 I b i d . r e l a t i o n s h i p the companies enjoy through t h e i r Associa- t i o n (I.F.L.R.A.), job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was not as large a problem as might have been expected. Nonetheless, there were s t i l l g l a r i n g examples of misuse of job t i t l e s , i . e . , many operations used the t i t l e Chipper Operator, others used Chipper Attendant. Under the plan, a Chipper Operator u s u a l l y had some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for chip q u a l i t y and almost c e r t a i n l y changed the chipper knives. There- fore, upon completion of the plan, the operator may have become an attendant and vice versa. This was not an i n d i c a t i o n of interference with job content- i t meant simply that i n analyzing job content the function was being re-defined, while management retained i t s peroga- t i v e with regard to 30b content. J In accordance with the terms of the 1969 contract (the plan had not been started i n the interim, 1967-69), a j o i n t committee, including members of the I n t e r i o r Forest Labour Relations Association (I.F.L.R.A.), the Northern I n t e r i o r Labour Association (N.I.L.A.), and the International Woodworkers of America (I.W.A.), was formed and undertook the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the develop- ment of the sawmill job evaluation plan. An i n i t o a l step in t h i s development, preceding the introduction, of I b i d . , p. 8. interview teams into the f i e l d (as described a b c ~ ' was made during 1969, with the agreement upon a set of administrative procedures. These procedures established committees, described t h e i r functions, defined the scope of the plan (to include a l l production workers, but exclude trade categories), and sp e l l e d out the appeal procedure. Most s i g n i f i c a n t l y , provision was made for the involvement of union l o c a l business agents and the l o c a l plant management i n determining the facts r e l a t i v e to job content, and es t a b l i s h i n g the need for reevaluation. In December of 1969 i n i t i a l steps were taken by the committee to e s t a b l i s h a JOB EVALUATION MANUAL, and the necessary documentation for recording job content.^ 4 Detailed examination of the manual follows in a sub- sequent s e c t i o n . Following completion of the job studies by the three interview teams, two evaluation teams were charged with the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for f i n a l gradings and r a t i n g s . Representing the I.W.A. were Lome Fingarson and Maurice Walls: for the I.F.L.R.A., John Houstcn and Rory G i l l i e s . Walls and G i l l i e s d id the p r e l i x - - a r y 1-Lome Fingarson, Interim Report c~ Sawmill Job Evaluation i n the In t e r i o r Locals of B.C., August, 1970, p. 1. evaluation work with Fingarson and Houston f i n a l irir.g matters."'"5 The majority of this work was c a r r i e d out in October-November, 1971, due to a deadline aiming at completion of the plan by December 1, 1971, i n order to have the plan working by January 1, 1972. This had been preceded by j o i n t committee work in la t e 1969 and ear l y 1970 to resolve c e r t a i n technical d i f f i c u l t i e s a f t e r which the way was paved for the two evaluating teams. The j o i n t committee at that time was composed o f : 1 5 I.W.A. (1) Lome Fingarson ( P a c i f i c Northwest) (2) Tony VanderHeide - Evaluator I.F.L.R.A. (3) B i l l Fisher (Stevenson & Kellogg) " (4) John Houston - Evaluator Their work- involved establishment of benchmark jobs and plants, intensive study of a sample plan, and t e s t i n g i n selec t e d locations regarding i n s t a l l a t i o n on a temporary 17 b a s i s . By January 1, 1972, some 45 sawmills were implementing job evaluation. The j o i n t committee, with two evaluators from each side, has made several r e f i n e - ments since that time. I t i s expected that by A p r i l , 1973, 50 sawmills w i l l have evaluation o p e r a t i c - a l . Maurice Walls, Interview with the Writer, March 2, 1973. l^Lorne Fingarson, Interview with the Writer, March 1, 1973. 1 7 I b i d . On A p r i l 1, 1973 "the bulk of the work-load begir_s ar-zir. 18 with a wholesale re-examination of the system." Addi- t i o n a l l y , in December 1972, and January 1973, c e r t a i n categories were revised to decrease the incidence of red c i r c l e s and e s t a b l i s h a more acceptable tolerance l e v e l . S p e c i f i c a l l y , some f o r k l i f t and heavy log-loading equipment operators had t h e i r rates revised upwards to make them competitive with those in the construction and pulp and paper indus t r i e s . Unfortunately, the Northern I n t e r i o r , which had a study clause regarding job evaluation inserted i n i t s 1969 contract, rejected evaluation outright in 1971. I t was mutually decided by the Northern I n t e r i o r Lumbermen's Association (N.I.L.A.), now c a l l e d the North Cariboo Lumbermen's Association, and the l o c a l s of the I.W.A. that such a program would be too c o s t l y to administer. Both sides feared that the plan would t i e them to the Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation and i t s r e s u l t a n t lower h i s t o r i c a l wage pattern. I t has been estimated that i f evaluation had been introduced, 35% red c i r c l e s 1 9 would have resulted (against 19% red c i r c l e s in the South). i UTony VanderHeide, Interview with the Writer, March 1, 1973. l^Maurice Walls, Interview with the Writer, March 1, 1973. The I.W.A. submits that maximum tolerance i s normally between 8-10%.2<^ No explanation was given to substantiate t h i s statement, but I suspect that i t was just t y p i c a l union "hot a i r " . To my thinking, the 19% red c i r c l e rate in the I n t e r i o r was not excessive. Indeed what would be the purpose of job evaluation i f r e v i s i o n of wage rates didn't produce such discrepancies? Closer inspection of the Job Evaluation Manual in the next two chapters w i l l continue to broaden the h i s t o r i c a l perspective. (( CHAPTER IX SOUTHERN INTERIOR SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION: DEVELOPMENT OF THE MANUAL In an o r i g i n a l study of the industry in 1967 (see Fingarson's Interim Report), a s e r i e s of factors were suggested f o r i n c l u s i o n i n a sawmill evaluation p l a n . The f a c t o r s proposed at the time d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n both content and weight from those found in the plywood job evaluation plan, and deviated from those used by F.I.R. in t h e i r proposed evaluation of sawmills on the Coast. Through d i f f i c u l t and p e r s i s t e n t negotiation, the Sawmill Job Evaluation Committee, with the assistance of the evaluation personnel from both industry and the union, were able to e s t a b l i s h e a r l y i n 1970 the factors and t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s to be included in the sawmill evaluation plan for the i n t e r i o r . A comparison of the o r i g i n a l factor t i t l e s with those established by the Sawmill Job Evaluation Committee indicates that the f i n a l s e l e c t i o n of f a . r r c ~ approximates very c l o s e l y to the c r i t e r i a established in 1967 (see t a b l e ) . 78 O r i g i n a l Factor T i t l e s 1. Specialized Training 2. Job Training 3. Judgment 4. Physical Co-ordination 5. Physical E f f o r t S. Recovery R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 7. Production R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 7 Agreed Upon Factor T i t l e s 1. Job Knowledge 2. On the Job Experience 3. Manual S k i l l 4. Physical E f f o r t 5. V i s u a l E f f o r t 6. Judgment Lumber Recovery 8. Equipment R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 8. Production Flow 9. Supervision 10. Working conditions (a) Weather (b) Noise (c) Hazards 9. Equipment 10. Safety of Others 11. Contacts With Others 12. Personal Hazards 13. Personal Discomforts Source: Lome Fingarson, "Interim Report on Sawmill Job Evaluation i n the I n t e r i o r Locals of B.C.", August, 1970, p. 2. Of p a r t i c u l a r importance i n the s e l e c t i o n of the factors i s the i n c l u s i o n of Lumber Recovery, Produc- t i o n Flow, and Equipment, since these areas have been a constant source of d i f f i c u l t y in the plywood evaluation p l a n . 2 1 In order to t e s t the v a l i d i t y of the rectors selected i n a p p l i c a t i o n , and to develop sample gradirvgs Fingarson, "Interim Report," p. 2. upon which to base the subsequent weighting of the plan, 83 jobs were graded i n f i v e d i f f e r e n t plants. At the same time as the grading procedure was c a r r i e d out, appropriate f a c t gathering procedures and documentation were developed. The plants studied were: (1) Kootenay Forest Products Nelson (2) Grand Forks Sawmills Grand Forks (3) S.M. Simpson (Division of Crown Kelowna Zellerbach) (4) Federated Co-operative Canoe (5) Alexandra Forest Products McKenzie In addition, b r i e f surveys were c a r r i e d out at M e r r i l l Wagner i n Williams Lake and Bulkley Valley Forest Products at Houston. Lim i t a t i o n of time permitted the complete study of only one of the f i v e plants, namely Grand Forks Sawmills. In the other plants sample jobs were selected to cover the e n t i r e range of a c t i v i t i e s that take place in a sawmill. Subsequent gradings proved that, for the purposes of developing comparative cost information throughout the Southern I n t e r i o r , the basis used to develop the o r i g i n a l cost estimates during the 1970 negotiations (Grand Forks ' •Sawmilils) was not t r u l y representative. This b£.si_= was the number of men per category working on a one cay s h i f t as observed during evaluation tours. This ccsc was repre- sented as the increased labour cost which implementing job evaluation was expected to incur. This basis was chosen to determine the o v e r a l l e f f e c t s on p r o d u c t i v i t y by introducing the scheme. I t was expected that rJhir cost would be more than o f f s e t by productivity gains although no supporting c a l c u l a t i o n s were made. As a r e s u l t of t h i s evaluation. Grand Forks, with a t o t a l of 60 men i n a l l categories, produced a cost of 6 .9C per hour per man, and a t o t a l of four red c i r c l e s , or a 6.7% red c i r c l e r a t e . Of the t o t a l of 60 men, 50, or 83.3% received increases and 6 jobs remained unchanged. A summary of the r e s u l t s for each union l o c a l by m i l l , and a summary of the r e s u l t s for the e n t i r e Southern I n t e r i o r region follows in t a b l e s . Hindsight has shown that perhaps Balco Forest Products (Kamloops), with a t o t a l of 70 men in a l l categories, a cost of 4.7C per hour per man, and a t o t a l of 22 c i r c l e s or a 31.4% red c i r c l e rate would have been a better choice for developing the comparative cost information. Of the t o t a l of 70 men, 46, or 55.7% received increases 22 and two jobs remained unchanged at Balco. I t was found, as a r e s u l t of these studies, that the s e l e c t i o n of factors was appropriate, t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n or grading structure was applicable, and the general scheme of data c o l l e c t i o n was p r a c t i c a l . The 2 2 L 0 r n e Fingarson and John Houston, " r e p o r t on F i n a l Gradings in the B r i t i s h Columbia Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation Program", December, 1971, p. 2. 81 SUMMARY OF GRADING RESULTS SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION SOUTHERN INTERIOR Local Total No. Men Increases Red Circles No Change Average */Hr/Mai No. % No. No. % Local 1-417 - Kamloops 613 367 59„9 143 23.3 103 16.8 4.3 Local 1-423 - Kelo\vna 591 440 74.5 71 12.0 80 13.5 5.4 Local 1-405 - Cranbrook 531 350 66.0 118 22.2 63 11.8 4.4 TOTAL SOUTHERN INTERIOR 1735 1157 66.7 332 19.1 246 14.2 4.7 f .C 'T iCh' : L . A . iPin^rrson- ?: Ho'.-.s • • on, r e n o r t. on 1T i n a l Grr.c i i i n the B r i t i s h .' :cl i ?. So" • }-: p -p "p A r t. c rc i o r r * i 11 Iivp»lv.p.tion l ' ; ror r enc driver, " Dec ?-i JJ-71. 82 SUMMARY OF GRADING RESULTS SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION LOCAL 1-417 -KAMLOOPS Com. • Total No. Increases Red Ci rcles No Change Average No. Company Men No. % No. % No. % £/Hr/Man 101 Balco Forest Products 70 46 65.7 22 31.4 2 2.9 4.7 102 Savona Ti mber Co. (Evans) 47 12 25.6 13 ;27.7 22 46.7 2.3 103 B.C. Interior 67 36 53.7 5 7.5 26 38.8 4.6 104 Monte Lake Lumber (C.Z.) 47 40 85.2 2 4,3 5 10.5 7.2 105 K. P. Wood Products, Merritt 34 26 76.5 5 14.7 3 8.8 3.7 106 Clearwater Timber-Sawmill 32 17 53.2 15 46.8 - - 2.5 107 Clearwater Timber- Planer 24 15 62.5 9I -37.5 i - - 3.2 108 Nicola Valley Sawmills Ltd. <46 33 71.8 7 15.2 6 13.0 5.1 109 Clearwater Timber-Vavenby 45 30 66.7 15 .33.3 - - 2.7 110 K. P. Wood P roducts, Avola 46 29 63.1 8 17.4 9 19.5 5.2 111 O'Neil Devine 20 8 40.0 7 35.0 5 25.0 2.5 112 Federated Cooperatives 62 35 56.5 23 37.1 4 6.4 4.3 113 Tappen Valley 30 21 70.0 2 6.7 T 23.3 5.7 115 Commercial Lumber Co. (Evans) 43 19 44.2 10 23.2 !•= 12. 6 2.2 TOTALS 613 367 59.9 j 143 22.3 103 16 . £ 4.3 SUMMARY OF GRADING RESULTS SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION LOCAL 1-42.3 - KELOWNA Cora. Total No. Increases 1 Red Circles No Chaage Ave race No. Men No. /0 No. No. $/Hr/Ms=. 201 Crown Zellerbach -Falkland 10 8 80.0 2 20.0 - - 5.1 202 Crown Zellerbach-Armstrong 27 19 70.3 5 18.5 3 11.2 5.7 203 K. P. Wood Products, Lumby 38 34 89.5 1 2.6 3 7.9 7.2 204 Crown Zellerbach-Lumby 45 33 73.4 5 11.1 7 15.5 6.1 205 Riverside Forest Products 25 22 88.0 1 4.0 2 8.0 8.2 206 S & M Timber 4 4 100.0 - - ' - 11.1 207 Crown Zellerbach-Enderby 31 28 83.9 1 3.2 4 12.9 5.6 209 C.Z. - Kelowna Lumber 77 54 70.2 9 11.7 14 18.1 4.8 210 Northwood Properties Penmill 33 29 87.9 1 3.0 3 9.1 5 * 2 1 1 Northwood Properties (OLD) Western Pines 40 31 77.5 6 15.0 3 7.5 5.0 212 Boundary Forest Products, G. F. 60 50 83.3 4 6.7 6 10.0 6.9 213 Boundary Forest Products - Midway 65 35 53.8 23 35.4 7 10.8 4.7 2H5 Yellow Lake Sawmills Ltd. 12 10 83.3 - - 2 16.7 6.7 1216 Northwood Properties (NEW) Western Pines 48 35 72.9 4 8.3 9 18.8 5.1 5J17 Greenwood Forest Products 22 11 50.0 3 13.6 8 36.4 6.9 218 Northwood Properties, O.K.Falls 54 39 72.3 6 11.1 9 16.6 4.9 7T7ALS 591 440 74.5 1 71 12.0 80 13.5 5.4 ~,:o'-:-?.tnn . h ^ n i ' t . i''pp. 1Q71 SUMMARY OF GRADING RESULTS SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION LOCAL 1-405 - CRANBROOK Com. Total No. Increases Red Circles No C hange Average No. Company Men No. % No. % No. % $ A i r A l a n 301 Triangle Pacific Forest Prods, 66 42 63.7 15 22.8 9 13.5 3.9 302 Glenmerry Sawmills Ltd. 27 20 74.2 3 11.1 4 14.7 6.6 303 Hearn 26 19 73.2 - - 7 26.8 9.2 304 F.R. Rotter Lumber Co* Ltd. 25 24 96.0 - - 1 4.0 10.2 305 Crow's Nest Industries Ltd. 55 32 58.2 22 40.0 1 1.8 2.6 306 Galloway Lumber Co. Ltd. 39 21 53.8 12 30.8 6 15.4 4.0 308 Kootenay Forest Products Ltd. 71 46 64.8 15 21.2 10 14.0 3.3 309 Revelstoke Sawmill (Radium) Ltd, 42 28 66.7 13 31.0 1 2.3 4.7 312 Crestbrook Forest Products - Cranbrook 74 46 62.2 17 23.0 11 14,8 3.9 313 Crestbrook Forest Products - Canal Flats 69 44 63.8 17 24.7 8 11.5 3.4 314 Crestbrook Forest Products - Parsons 37 28 75.7 4 10.8 5 13.5 4.4 TOTALS 531 350 66.0 118 22.2 Sc 11.8 4.4 311 Columbia Cellulose 90 32 35.6 44 48.8 14 15.6 , 1.5 weighting of the factors was c a r r i e d out by two consul- tants; the e f f e c t s of a p p l i c a t i o n of the r e s u l t s to the 83 jobs were reviewed i n d e t a i l with members of the committee and f i n a l adjustments were then made by the consultants. Factors and t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s , and the appropriate weightings were approved i n f i n a l form by 23 the Sawmill Job Evaluation Committee in June, 1970. I t should be pointed out that t h i s procedure of j o i n t development of a job evaluation manual between industry and a union i s of considerable s i g n i f i c a n c e in the f i e l d of wage administration. I t should be further noted that the manual represents a dramatic step forward i n the design of job evaluation plans, since the structure of the selected factors permits considerably more f l e x - i b i l i t y i n weighting than that a v a i l a b l e in most other job evaluation plans. In July, 1970, the Sawmill Job Evaluation Committee undertook the d i f f i c u l t negotiation task of e s t a b l i s h i n g appropriate job groups. The i n i t i a l pro- posal by the industry was a structure of 12 job groups, whereas the o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n of the union members was 25 job groups. A t o t a l of 19 job groups was eventually approved by the committee, with d i v i d i n g points her«-eer. Fingarson, "Interim Report," p. 3. groups selected to permit greater discrimination among jobs at. the lower end of the scale than at the upper end of the scale. Since the majority of jobs f a l l at che I~--er end of the scale, such a job group structure w i l l have the e f f e c t of spreading the jobs further along the wage scale or higher above the base r a t e . A comparison of the percentage d i s t r i b u t i o n of jobs above the base rate p r i o r to evaluation, with that a f t e r evaluation follows on the next page. For purposes of analysis, jobs were grouped by wages then being paid (1970) i n groups which com- pared d i r e c t l y with the established point structure of the job groups. The wage figures however, did not represent agreed upon wage rates for the job groups but were rather an a n a l y t i c a l grouping to demonstrate the impact of the evaluation procedure. The table does not take into consideration the actual wages negotiated for each group. Irrespective of these f i n a l wage rates, i t i s apparent that the valuation procedure s i g n i f i c a n t l y 24 spread the jobs out above the base r a t e . Ibid., pp. 4-5. Table : D i s t r i b u t i o n of 83 Test Study Jobs Before and After Evaluation Before Evaluation After Evaluation % i n Cumulative % in Cumulative Job Group or Equivalent Group % Group % Below Base Rate 1 .2% 1 .2% Base Rate or Group 1 14 .5% 15 .7% 9 .6% 9 .6% Group 2 or $2.99-3.02 8.4% 24 .1% 9 .6% 19 .3% Group 3 or $3.03-3.07 14 .5% 38 . 6% 9 .6% 28 .9% Group 4 or $3.08-3.13 15 .7% 54 .2% 8 .4% 37 .4% Group 5 or $3.14-3.19 7 .2% 61 .5% 9 .6% 47 .0% Group 6 or $3.20-3.27 6 .0% 67 .5% 10 QO/ • O / o 57 .8% Group 7 or $3.28-3.35 12 .9% 79 .5% 16 .9% 74 .7% Group 8 or $3 .36-3.43 7 .2% 86 .7% 4 .8% 79 .5% Group 9 or $3.44-3.51 3 .6% 90.4% 3 .6% 84 .1% Group 10 or $3.52-3.59 3 .6% 94 .0% 3 .6% 86 .8% Group 11 or $3.60-3.68 94 .0% 4 .8% 91 .6% Group 12 or $3.69-3.77 1 .2% 95 .2% 2 .4% 94 .0% Group 13 or $3 178-3.86 1 .2% 96 .4% - 94 .0% Group 14 or $3.87-3.95 - 96 .4% 1 .2% 95 .2% Group 15 or $3.96-4.04 1 .2% 97 .6% - 95 .2% Group 16 or $4.05-4.13 - . 97 .6% - 95 .2% Group 17 or $4.14-4.22 - 97 .6% 2 —r- ,6% Group 18 or $4.23-4.31 1 .2% 98 .8% - - s% 98 . -2% Group 19 or $4.32-4.41 1 .2% 100 .0% 100 .074 Source: Lome Fingarson, Interim Report on Sawmill Job Evaluation in the I n t e r i o r Locals of B.C., August, 1970, p. 5. A s i m i l a r c h a r t was developed f o r Grand Forks Sawmills, the on l y complete p l a n t s t u d i e d i n the i n i t i a l s t a g e s . The movement of f i n a l wage r a t e s , as i s i n d i c a t e d i n the t a b l e which f o l l o w s , i s more dramatic, and s i n c e t h i s data represented a complete p l a n t , i t was thought to be more i n d i c a t i v e of the general r e s u l t s t o be expected throughout the i n d u s t r y . Table : D i s t r i b u t i o n of 35 Test Study Jobs at Grar.-. Forks Sawmills Before and After Evalua--o-_ Before Evaluation After Evaluation % i n Cumulative % in Cumulative Job Group or Equivalent Group % Group % Below Base Rate - - - - Group 1 or Base Rate 22.9% 22 .9% 11.4% 11 .4% Group 2 or $2.99-3.02 11.4% 34 .3% 14.3% 25 .7% Group 3 or $3.03-3.07 11.4% 45 .7% 5.7% 31 .4% Group 4 or $3.08-3.13 5.7% 51.4% 14.3% 45 .7% Group 5 or $3.14-3.19 25.7% 77 .2% 8.6% 54 .3% Group 6 or $3.20-3.27 5.7% 82 .9% 17.1% 71 .5% Group 7 or $3.28-3.35 5.7% 88 .6% 11.4% 82 .8% Group 8 or $3 .36-3.43 2.9% 91 .4% - 82 .8% Group 9 or $3.44-3.51 2.9% 94 .3% 2.9% 85 .7% Group 10 or $3.52-3.59 2.9% 97 .2% 5.7% 91 .4% Group 11 or $3.60-3.68 - 97 .2% 5.7% 97 .2% Group 12 or $3.69-3.77 - 97 .2% - 97 .2% Group 13 or $3.78-3.86 - 97 .2% - 97 .2% Group 14 or $3 .87-3.95 2.9% 100 .0% - 97 .2% Group 15 or $3.96-4.04 - 97 .2% Group 16 or $4.05-4.13 - 97 .2% Group 17 or $4.14-4.22 2.9% i : o .0% Source; Lome Fingarson, Interim Report on S a > — i l l J o b Evaluation in the I n t e r i o r Locals o f _.C, August, 1970, p. 6. CHAPTER X SOUTHERN INTERIOR SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION: JOB FACTORS AND WAGE CURVE The job evaluation plan for the B.C. I n t e r i o r sawmill industry was developed j o i n t l y between the Industry and the respective Local Unions of Regional Council No. 1, I.W.A. The rela t e d Manual, Wage Curve, and Administrative Procedures were negotiated to form an i n t e g r a l part of the contract presently i n existence between the P a r t i e s . The plan i s t e c h n i c a l l y known as a Factor Comparison-Points System and as such i s admin- i s t e r e d j o i n t l y by an equal number of evaluators employed r e s p e c t i v e l y by the Industry and by the Union. The basis of the plan i s formed by a personal interview with an incumbent which r e s u l t s i n a Job Study Record, completed and reconciled j o i n t l y between the Industry and the Union for each category covered by the plan. The purpose of the design and the administration of the plan i s to determine the r e l a t i v e point value of an i n d i v i d u a l gob category w i t h i n a B.C. I n t e r i o r sawmill operatic- ir; comparison with other categories within that s p e c i f i c operation and in r e l a t i o n to comparable categories within the B.C. I n t e r i o r sawmill industry generally. The determination of these r e l a t i v e point values is the j o i n t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the afore-mentioned Evaluators 25 and i s based upon: (1) "on s i t e " observation of categories for which completed and reconciled JOB STUDY RECORDS have been submitted, (2) a p p l i c a t i o n of the appropriate degree for each of the factors contained i n the Manual. The factors contained in the Manual are t h i r t e e n in number (as opposed to eleven in plywood) and f a l l into four major groupings as follows (the same as plywood): A. Knowledge and S k i l l B. E f f o r t C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s D. Job Conditions However, the r e l a t i v e weightings of the Interior sawmill plan deviated s i g n i f i c a n t l y from those of plywood: Plywood I n t e r i o r Sawmill A. Knowledge and S k i l l 34.3% 20.1% B. E f f o r t 21.6 16.8 C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 34.3 56.7 D. Job Conditions 9.8 6.4 100.0% 100.0% By g r e a t l y increasing the emphasis on the Re s p o n s i b i l i t y f a c t o r s , s p e c i f i c a l l y on Lumber P^^v-zry 2 5 I n t e r i o r Sawmill Industry Job E v a l - S - i o n Manual December, 1971, pp. 1-2. 2 6 I b i d . and Production Flow, I believe the Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation has opened new doors in i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s . Recognition that the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for increasing and/or maintaining Recovery and/or Grade, and that the degree of influence exercised by the job function over i n t e r r e l a t e d job functions were important f a c t o r s , indicated to management that Job Evaluation i s a worthwhile technique. 2 7 Provision to include such production-related factors has to make Job Evaluation more t o l e r a b l e to management. On the other hand, de-emphasis of the Knowledge and S k i l l factors, p a r t i c u l a r l y Education, makes Job Evaluation more acceptable to the Union. Most s i g n i f i - cantly, i t indicates to the writer that there i s some room for compromise and co-operation in Job Evaluation schemes. I wholeheartedly support t h i s s h i f t in philosophy on both sides, and strongly recommend that the proposed Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation program be rewritten and r e v i s e d incorporating s i m i l a r changes. In i l l u s t r a t i n g the groups and factors chosen fo r the I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation, I have contrasted 28 them to the Plywood Evaluation: ^ 'Lome Fingarson, Interview with the Writer, Nov. 18, 1972. 2 3Plywood Industry of B.C. Job Evaluation Manual, Amended August, 1971. I n t e r i o r Sawmill Industry Job Evaluation Manuel, December, 1971. A. Knowledge and S k i l l factors which i n d i c _ _ - t a requirement for s p e c i f i c knowledge and s k i l l . o n the part of the i n d i v i d u a l who f i l l s the job. I n t e r i o r Sawmill Plywood Evaluation Evaluation 1. Education 1. Job Knowledge 2. Experience 2. On-the-Job 3. Complexity of Duties Experience 4. Manual Dexterity 3. Manual S k i l l I believe the I n t e r i o r factors represent an improvement over the Plywood scheme because they are fewer i n number, are more s p e c i f i c , and eliminate the general categories of "Education" and "Experience". B. E f f o r t factors which take into account the demands of the job in p h y s i c a l exertion and in judgment as well as v i s u a l e f f o r t . I n t e r i o r Sawmill Plywood Evaluation Evaluation 5. Physical Demand 4. Physical E f f o r t 6. Mental and V i s u a l 5. Visual E f f o r t Demand 6. Judgment Retention of Physical Demand as a factor was a sound decision for I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation. Marked improvement was forthcoming by d i v i d i n g Mental and V i s u a l Demand into V i s u a l E f f o r t and Judgment, two d i s t i - r t processes. C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . The factors in th i s group appraise the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s which are inherent i n the performance of the job. In t e r i o r Sawmill Plywood Evaluation Evaluation 7. Res p o n s i b i l i t y for 7. Lumber Recovery Supervision 8. Production Flow 8. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for 9. Equipment the Safety of (a) Mobile Others (b) Stationary 9. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for (c) A u x i l i a r y Materials, Equip- 10. Safety of others ment, and Products 11. Contacts (a) external (b) i n t e r n a l I t i s in the area of R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s that the Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation Plan made the greatest improvement over i t s predecessor. The category is more s p e c i f i c , r e l a t e s more d i r e c t l y to production, (and there- fore, to d o l l a r s and cents for management) and, i s weighted r e l a t i v e l y heavier (56.7% versus 34.3%). Two c r i t i c i s m s ; I believe Safety should be a part of JOB CONDITIONS rather than R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and the factor "Contacts" is vague. D. Job Conditions. These factors appraise the conditions of the job from the worker's point of view. The analysis i s in terms of the disagreeable aspects of the job. Inte r i o r Sawmill Plywood Evaluation Evaluation 10. Hazards 12. Personal Hararos 11. Working Conditions 13. Personal I o=ccnforr-s Again, I think Sawmill Evaluation is more s p e c i f i c Secondly, I agree that a r e l a t i v e l y lower weighting {6.4% versus 9.8%) indicates more preparation was involve.-: ir. planning the newer Job Evaluation program. Appendix III describes the I n t e r i o r Sawmill Industry Job Evaluation Manual and i t presents the job factors in considerably more d e t a i l for the discerning reader. The wage curve for I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation follows c l o s e l y the format established by Plywood. How- ever, i t does have larger, more frequent increments. The d i f f e r e n t i a l s between successive point grades are four cents from grade one to two, f i v e cents from grade two to four, s i x cents from grade four to ten, eight cents from grade ten to twelve, ten cents from grade twelve to fourteen, twelve cents from grade fourteen to seventeen, and fourteen cents from grade seventeen to n i n e t e e n 2 9 (see Point-Grade-Rate Chart and accompanying graph). This plan was i n e f f e c t a percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l program, as the increments increased with the t o t a l number o f points in order that greater s k i l l jobs should have increased money value r e l a t i v e to low-level jobs. At the time, neither side was w i l l i n g to move to the per- centage increase and break t r a d i t i o n with the h i s t o r i c a l l y negotiated, across-the-board, equal money increases. Recently however, the Celgar plant in Castlec-r negotiated 2 9 _ n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation Program: Point- Grade -Rate-Chart, December, 1 9 7 1 . INTERIOR SAWMILL INDUSTRY JOB E V A L U A T I O N ??. 7 , - G P . A M POINT - GRADE - R A T E - CHART POINTS ' GRADE R A T E °- 80 1 Base Rate ' 8 1 - HO 2 Plus $0.04 1 1 1 " 150 3 Plus $0.09 1 5 1 " 200 4 Plus $0. 14 2 0 1 " 250 5 P l u s $0.20 2 5 1 - 3 1 ° 6 Plus $0.26 3 1 1 " 3 7 0 ' 7 Plus $0.32 3 7 i " 4 3 0 8 Plus $0.38 4 3 i -490 9 Plus $0.44 491 " 550 10 Plus $0.50 5 5 1 - 620 11 p l u s $ 0. 58 6 2 i " 690 12 Plus $0.66 6^1 - 760 13 Plus $0.76 7 6 1 - 830 14 p l u s £ Q t 8 6 331 - 900 15 p l u s c i m z z 901.- 970 16 P r - s S i . 1 0 9 7 1 " 1 0 4 0 17 " ' p ; u 5 $1.22 1 0 4 1 - m 0 18 Plus $1.36 1 1 1 1 " i l 8 0 19 Plus $1.50  a percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l wage curve (average 2.25\-. ,•-- which may have set a precedent for future Job Evaluation plans to follow. Since Plywood Evaluation no longer has to operate ' i n i s o l a t i o n within the larger framework of B.C.'s fo r e s t industry, i t becomes less important that the p o l i c y for e s t a b l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t i a l s between groups should be e s s e n t i a l l y the same as that which governs d i f f e r e n t i a l s between jobs of d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s i n logging and sawmilling (on the coast). I t is my personal b e l i e f ' that in the long run, the percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l and percentage increase are more equitable and c e r t a i n l y more defensible. I f the Union continues to push for i t , percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l w i l l very l i k e l y be established in the B.C. Coast Sawmill Evaluation P l a n . 3 1 The following table i l l u s t r a t e s the point range and increments established from the most recent contract negotiations: J UMaurice Walls (Plywood Evaluator, IM~..-«.), Interview with the Writer, March 2, 1973. •^Ldrne Fingarson, Interview v/ith the Writer, March 1, 1973. POINT RANGE INCREMENTS The point range and increments for the 20 groups are as follows: Increment as Wage Group Points Range a percentage of base rate Resulting Increment Resulting Rates July 1/72 July 1/73 July 1/72 July 1/73 1 0-60 Base rate Base rate 2 61-80 1.00 .04 .04 4.125 4.49 3 81-110 1.14 .05 .05 4.175 4.54 4 111-150 1.28 .05 .06 4.225 4.60 5 151-200 1.42 .06 .06 4.285 4.66 6 201-250 1.56 .06 .07 4.345 4.73 7 251-310 1.70 .07 .08 4.415 4.81 8 311-370 1.83 .07 .08 4.485 4.89 9 371-430 1.97 .08 .09 4.565 4.98 10 431-490 2.11 .09 .09 4.655 5.07 11 491-550 2.25 .09 .10 4. 745 5.17 12 551-620 2.39 .10 .11 4.845 5.28 13 621-690 2.53 .10 .11 4.945 5 .39 14 691-760 2.67 .11 .12 5.055 5.51 15 761-830 2.81 .11 .13 5.165 5.64 16 831-900 2.95 .12 .13 5.285 5. 77 17 901-970 3.08 .13 .14 5.415 5.91 10 971-1040 3.22 .13 .14 5.545 6.05 1!) 1041-1110 3.50 .14 .15 5.685 6.20 20 1111-1180 3.50 .14 .15 5.825 6.35 Source : .John liouston, I.F.L.R.A., July, 1972. CHAPTER XI SOUTHERN INTERIOR SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION: ANALYSIS At t h i s stage the f u l l impact of the a p p l i c a t i o n of Job Evaluation to the sawmill section of the industry in the I n t e r i o r i s not apparent. By A p r i l 1, 1973, some 50 plants should be operating under the plan, but u n t i l the plan i s completely i n s t a l l e d a l l the benefits w i l l not be apparent. Beginning on A p r i l 1st, the f i r s t whole- sale re-evaluation and r e v i s i o n begins to see i f any job factor, degrees, groups, e t c . require a major overhaul. In January, 1973, I.W.A. Evaluators and I.F.L.R.A. Evaluators resolved the nagging problem of mobile equip- ment by increasing the points t o t a l from 240 to 310. This s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced the red c i r c l e rate for the o v e r a l l I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation, and provided the f i r s t r e a l t e s t of management-union c o l l a b o r a t i o n over evaluation. I believe the re-evaluation w i l l prove successful because i t reduced the red c i r c l e rate making the plan -ore t o l e r - a b l e to the union; i t s a t i s f i e d management's desire to see expensive heavy equipment being operated by more s a t i s f i e d , s k i l l e d operators; and i t recompensed an area which was obviously undervalued in the i n i t i a l evaluation. Another b e n e f i t may accrue i n the East Kootenay area, where a problem has arisen through the higher paying construction industry's practise, "siphoning o f f " f o r e s t 32 industry heavy equipment operators. At t h i s stage, i t i s evident that several s i g n i f cant advantages w i l l accrue to the union from Job Evalua- t i o n . As indicated in the tables i n Chapter IX ( D i s t r i b u - t i o n of Test Study Jobs), the plan w i l l d i s t r i b u t e the jobs further along the wage scale than at present. "This r e s u l t can only be e f f e c t i v e l y produced with a t o o l such as job evaluation, and the best e f f o r t s of rate r e v i s i o n 33 w i l l not duplicate the e f f e c t . " I must concur. The preceding statement d e f i n i t i v e l y i l l u s t r a t e s that Job Evaluation is worthwhile as a technique i n union- management r e l a t i o n s . I cannot think of another sing l e method which could encompass such a large geographical area, or such a large (7,000 people) and diverse work fo r c e . "Job Evaluation may not be the best technique developed thus f a r but I defy you to show me a better one I " 3 4 For example, detailed work measurement combined 3 2Tony VanderHeide, Interview with the 'writer. March 2, 1973. 3 3 L o r n e Fingarson, Interim Report c- Sawmill Jz'z Evaluation i n the I n t e r i o r Locals of B.C., August, 197 0 , p. 7. V 34Wyman Trineer, Interview with, the Writer, Feb. 1973. with method study to set up "work synthetics" may ir. f a c t be better but i s very expensive and di s r u p t i v e i n the short run. A major factor which contributed l a r g e l y to the plan's success revolved around i t s design and the weighting of the factors. Some consideration was given given to t r a d i t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between jobs in other areas than the i n t e r i o r as coast wage patterns were taken i n t o account. As a r e s u l t of t h i s broader base, many long standing inequities i n rela t i o n s h i p s that have persisted over the years, despite the active and dedi- cated e f f o r t s of l o c a l union personnel and I.F.L.R.A. negotiators, w i l l be in the main, corrected. Notable examples were the movement of the wage le v e l s of c a r r i e r d r i v e r s and fork l i f t operators, graders, and planermen who have h i s t o r i c a l l y received r e l a t i v e l y lower pay i n the i n t e r i o r than t h e i r counterparts on the coast. In addition, with the e x i s t i n g job structure, a negotiated wage curve w i l l produce s i g n i f i c a n t increases for many jobs. In p a r t i c u l a r , green chain p u l l e r s , who have always received base rate, received an increase due to being re-evaluated i n Group 2. As far as attitudes towards Job E v a l _ _ o i c n are concerned, I believe i t is safe to say t h a t the employers and t h e i r association, The I . F . L . , regard job evaluation e i t h e r favourably or more or less i n d i f - f e r e n t l y . While i t cannot be said that employers generally are strongly i n favour of job evaluation, there also appears to be l i t t l e opposition by employers to the method. They are w i l l i n g to pay f o r "peace at a p r i c e " . Strangely enough, the p o s i t i o n i s not e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t on the trade union s i d e . There does not appear to be any s i n g l e or o v e r - a l l union attitude or p o l i c y towards job evaluation. However, i t i s not f a i r to say that among the unionists there i s a great deal more in the way of frank opposition to the method than among the employers. In c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s trade unions have st r o n g l y c r i t i c i z e d the method as such. Thus, according to a manual printed by the International Association of Machinists i n the United States (forerunner to the B.C. Forest Industry Job Evaluation p l a n s ) 3 6 . Job Evaluation had three serious r e s t r i c t i o n s : 3 7 I . B a s i c a l l y , job evaluation tends to l i m i t c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. This r e f l e c t s i t s e l f i n the following ways: (1) I t tends to freeze the wage structure and thereby creates an obstacle to the 3 5 J o h n Houston, Interview with the Writer. Feb. 23, 1973. 3 6 L o r n e Fingarson, Interview with the Writer, Nov. 18, 1972. 3 i n t e r n a t i o n a l Association of Machinists (Research Department), What's Wrong With Job Evaluation. Washington, D.C., 1954, pp. 3-5. 104 co r r e c t i o n of i n e q u i t i e s . I t restri.r-r= the r i g h t of negotiating on a rate c f pay for each job year a f t e r year. I t usually l i m i t s negotiations to bargain- ing for a fixed amount or fixed percentage for a l l jobs, or e s t a b l i s h i n g rates of pay through some "predetermined formula" that usually does not r e s u l t in equitable treatment for a l l . (2) I t f a i l s to consider a l l forces which determine wages, such as supply and demand, other contract or area rates, e t c . (3) I t tends to create a b a r r i e r between the employee and his understanding of h i s own job rate, because his rate is set i n a manner not understood by him. (4) I t tends to disregard the a b i l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l . (5) I t places a c e i l i n g upon wages which i s contrary to a t r a d i t i o n a l objective of organ i zed labour. (6) I t disregards compensation for l o y a l t y , i . e . years of service, e t c . (7) I t tends to d i l u t e t r a d i t i o n a l s k i l l s , creating many new occupations and many new c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and thereby reducing wages. (8) I t a f f e c t s the s e n i o r i t y of employees by the creation of a d d i t i o n a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . (9) I t makes the promotion of employees into higher-paying jobs considerably more d i f f i c u l t because of the l i m i t i n g character- i s t i c of job d e s c r i p t i o n s . (10) I t provides the company with a tool t o down- grade employees during times of r o . t b a c . K £ . To comment, b r i e f l y , I believe ther t h e majoricy of these concepts are outmoded and outdated. The two sides had the foresight to take these objections into consideration and accordingly, incorporated solu_i.cr_s in the plan. For instance, a clause providing for p e r i o d i c re-evaluation was inserted in the contract to prevent freezing of the wage structure. The I.W.A. has been h i s t o r i c a l l y cognizant that supply and demand i n the for e s t products sector determines wage increases to a large extent. The Southern I n t e r i o r Evaluation was preceded by a number of seminars to acquaint i n d i v i d u a l employees with evaluation and what i t meant to them as i n d i v i d u a l s . The plan recognizes s e n i o r i t y and the indiv i d u a l ' s a b i l i t i e s through Knowledge and S k i l l factors. Construction of the plan to encompass retention of the t r a d i t i o n a l s k i l l s provided l i t t l e d i l u t i o n of these s k i l l s and yet some new occupations and c l a s s i f i c a - tions were introduced. No job went down in wage ra t e . I I . Job Evaluation presents a threat to the stab- i l i t y of the Union organization because of the following (1) I t necessitates the constant attention of ad d i t i o n a l trained representatives, there- by increasing the cost of representation to the Local, the Regional Council, and ultimately, Union Headquarters. (2) I t provides management with a t o o l to play one group of employees against _r_other, (3) I t creates dissension within the l o c a l s where a l l firms do not have job evaluation. I t tends to hamper the e f f o r t s of the Local in e s t a b l i s h i n g uniform area rates. 3 8 I b i d . (4) I t tends to place the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y upon the union for inequities that are not properly corrected since the union accepted the job evaluation plan and must, therefore, share i n i t s short- comings. (5) I t compels the continuing and almost impossible task of educating job study committees and shop stewards i n the many ramifications of the job evaluation plan i n e f f e c t . (6) I t encourages management of d i f f e r e n t plants to work together and provides them with a basic method to achieve j o i n t l y desired r e s u l t s in the determination of wages; i t strengthens management's opposition to the wage demands of the union. To comment, job evaluation at no time ever pre- sented a threat to the s t a b i l i t y of the union organization. Management and union p a r t i c i p a t e d equally i n a s i t u a t i o n where t r u s t prevailed, at l e a s t to the extent i t can in labour-management r e l a t i o n s . Each side r e a l i z e d , accepted, and was prepared to t r a i n and equip f u l l - t i m e Evaluators to oversee implementation and administration of the plan. Therefore, the cost was not " a d d i t i o n a l " in the sense outlined above. Management was d i r e c t l y inactive in the plan? the I.F.L.R.A. hired trained experts to carry out pre-stated goals and objectives of management. As far as dissension and inequities are con- cerned, the union was the body, through the far-aichredriess of Wyman Trineer, that prompted the investigation of jcr evaluation's merits and pushed to have i t adopted. The problem of education and f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with the g.la.r. i s an arduous one, but by no means impossible. With respect to strengthening management resistance, I think t h i s i s a f a l l a c y , and perhaps "defines" is a better word to use because the union can define the range and l i m i t s which management i s looking at, and thereby spend t h e i r time i n bargaining on more f r u i t f u l negotiations. I I I . The e f f e c t s of job evaluation upon the general welfare of our society are detrimental : 3 9 (1) I t a f f e c t s the supply of s k i l l e d workers by tending to discourage bona-fide apprenticeships and, therefore, reduces the r e s e r v o i r of o v e r - a l l s k i l l e d workers so that i n the event of a future c r i s i s a serious shortage of s k i l l e d manpower would r e s u l t . (2) Job evaluation does not promote i n d u s t r i a l harmony. (3) The method is not r e a l l y s c i e n t i f i c as i t does not f u l l y account for a l l the relevant factors which determine equitable wages. (4) I t i s so complex that i t i s l a r g e l y incomprehensible to the workers and disturbs labour-management r e l a t i o n s . (5) I t i s i n s u f f i c i e n t l y adaptable to the dynamic elements of our economy as they a f f e c t the process of wage determination because i t seeks to substitute would-be technical standards for market forces as r e f l e c t e d in c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. I disagree with some of these statements which are at best r e p e t i t i v e and contradictory anyway. Job 3 9 I b i d . evaluation i s only s c i e n t i f i c to the extent that i t i s obje c t i v e . Before the introduction of job evaluation i t was possible, and even customary, to f i x wages for p a r t i c u l a r workers or jobs in an a r b i t r a r y , highly subjective fashion. The Joi n t Evaluation Committee now ensures permanent p a r t i c i p a t i o n by workers' representa- t i v e s on an equal basis with those of industry. While day-to-day negotiations and compromise are not harmonious, s o c i e t y can b e n e f i t through long-term i n d u s t r i a l harmony which job evaluation provides. I do not believe job evaluation seeks to replace the elements of the competitive market place, rather i t attempts to provide some focus through which market forces can be evaluated and, sub- sequently, through which wages can be increased. Certain other problems had to be overcome to implement Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation. The primary task of I.W.A. leaders i s to safeguard and promote the well being of t h e i r membership. Secondly, the leaders are responsible for the growth of the organization they represent; t h i s may be affected by a va r i e t y of forces, i n c l u d i n g action by employers, r i v a l trade unions, or, as i s the case with the I.W.A., c o n f l i c t i n g s e c t i r c e l i n t e r e s t s within the union i t s e l f (generally c a l l e d factionalism) . This factor influences the union leader- ship, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n i t s strategy and t a c t i c s in the important f i e l d of wage negotiations and thereby c c r - c r r i b r t s s to the shaping of i t s attitude towards job evaluation. The stated objections against job evaluation by c e r t a i n union personnel do not hold water when j o i n t consultation and c o l l e c t i v e bargaining are two major features of I n t e r i o r Evaluation. Indeed, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to see how, i n cases where such machinery ex i s t s and operates e f f e c t i v e l y , job eval u a t i o n could ever be applied as a means of u n i l a t e r a l wage-fixing by the employer. However, t h i s does not preclude the f a c t that job evaluation raised c e r t a i n problems for the I.W.A. Apart from the sheer novelty, complexity, and unpredict- a b i l i t y of i t s r e s u l t s , the e x i s t i n g wage structure changed and the membership reacted to the changes. A problem has ar i s e n , as i t did i n Plywood Evaluation, with the member- ship's lack of understanding why t h e i r representatives are following an e n t i r e l y new, slower method of dealing with t h e i r urgent and legitimate wage claims. However, the l o g i s t i c s of thi s problem have been l a r g e l y cleared up by having Local representatives and Management at the plant l e v e l draw up and revise the tedious Job Description Forms, thereby leaving the Evaluators free to wcrs . r c rate r e v i s i o n . This has been accomplished by p l a c i n g increased r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s on job evaluation technicians but not at the expense of the I.W.A. union l e a d e r s . Formal acceptance of evaluation rules governing r e l a t i v e wages has tended to r e s t r i c t the scope for manoeuvrability in n e g o t i a t i o n s — b u t i t has done so equally for both sides. In view of the general trend towards mechanization and automation in I n t e r i o r sawmills, t h i s has l e d to reduced importance of physical e f f o r t in jobs and, in some cases, has led to a reduction i n s k i l l requirements. The Evaluation Committee neatly s i d e - stepped the problem by placing the emphasis on d o l l a r s and cents factors, i . e . , Recovery and Production Flow. In addition, increased p r o d u c t i v i t y has enabled the union to negotiate higher general wage increases. A number of a t t r a c t i v e conditions have helped t o make I.W.A. p a r t i c i p a t i o n in job evaluation favourable: (1) The union i s r e l a t i v e l y w e l l established, or even entrenched i n B.C., and feels reasonably secure. (2) The leaders of the union are now in a p o s i t i o n to commit themselves as the r i s k y , organizing phase of the scheme i s over. (3) The leadership's authority among the membership is not s e r i o u s l y disputed. (4) The scheme has been s i m p l i f i e d as much as reasonably p o s s i b l e . (5) Implementation was a j o i n t undertaking. ^ I n t e r n a t i o n a l Labour Organization, ^ o b svaluarion. Geneva, I960, pp. 109-111. ( 6 ) Job de s c r i p t i o n and job rating remain a j o i n t undertaking. (7) The process of job evaluation ceases with job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ; the determination of wage rates remains a separate subject of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. (8) The system has been designed and operated to allow a degree of f l e x i b i l i t y i n handling a large number of s p e c i a l considerations to be taken into account. The f a c t that the method has been usefu l as a device for wage adjustment i s la r g e l y because i t attempts to base wage d i f f e r e n t i a l s on considerations that are not purely technical, but have, in some degree at l e a s t , an e t h i c a l b a s i s . Job Evaluation has sought to give p r a c t i c a l expression to two p r i n c i p l e s of fairness that are so widely recognized that they cannot be regarded as "mere subjective assertions" inspired by group interests, namely: equal pay for equal work, and d i f f e r e n t i a l reward i n accordance with d i s c e r n i b l e differences i n the s a c r i f i c e s that the performance of productive work requires in terms of education, t r a i n i n g , personal a p p l i c a t i o n , and the - endurance of adverse c o n d i t i o n s . 4 ^ What remains of course is c o s t — t h e amount i n d o l l a r s and cents to implement and administer Jch V a l u a - ti o n in Southern I n t e r i o r sawmills. Management indicated, in 1967 and again in 1969, that 6.9 cents per -.an per hear was the cost which i t s Evaluators should s t r i v e to'achieve. ,41ibid., p. 112. 42Houston, Interview* In fact, they brought i n a figure of 4.7 cents (as indicated in Chapter IX) and a red c i r c l e rate of 19.1%. Reca l l that these figures represent implementation cost only expressed in terms which management can u t i l i z e in comparing increased costs to p r o d u c t i v i t y . From my experience, these figures do not mean as much to e i t h e r union or management as they might i n d i c a t e . When the need for a method of wage determination became pressing enough, then i t was b i l a t e r a l l y agreed to study job evaluation, and the plan was utlimately adopted. They had no idea of the actual costs involved. Investiga- t i o n and implementation of the Plywood Evaluation scheme has cost about $70,000 i n the period 1955-1959. 4 3 How- ever, the p a r t i e s to the scheme r e a l i z e d that i t was le s s than a quarter of the s i z e , in work force numbers, of the proposed Sawmill Evaluation. Presumably, management bears the majority of implementation costs, although neither side would p u b l i c l y admit that, but the union remains concerned because any evaluation scheme can be scrapped i f costs become prohib- i t i v e . In addition, the c o s t l i e r the implementation, the c o s t l i e r the administration. Therefore the I.W . JL . had a stake i n seeing that Sawmill Evaluation imple-satatir- costs remained t o l e r a b l e . Fingarson, Interview. Costs of i n s t a l l a t i o n in the Sawmill scce/ce eventually ran close to $250,000 with industry footing 75% of the b i l l . This figure included $150,000 during the developmental phase, approximately 75% of which was wasted on procrastination, poor planning, e t c . 4 4 Administration costs are expected to run in the area of $20,000-$25,000 yearly, on a s t r i c t cost sharing basis with each side paying t h e i r own wages, s a l a r i e s , materials, and t r a v e l . I t has been anticipated that Coast Sawmill Evaluation w i l l cost in excess of $500,000. I r e i t e r a t e , e valuation w i l l be undertaken when bargaining becomes too burdensome and i n t o l e r a b l e for the p a r t i e s to continue any longer. Therefore, cost, which i s a primary tolerance factor, w i l l not be the f i r s t consideration. I t has been s a i d , "these men of good f a i t h w i l l negotiate s e r i o u s l y as long as t h e i r ox i s n ' t being gored." 4 5 However, when tha t c r i s i s l e v e l i s reached and simple, d i r e c t bargaining appears to be achieving nothing, e i t h e r job evaluation w i l l be negotiated and undertaken as the basis for agreed settlement, or, as occurred in the 1972 Coast negotiations, bargaining w i l l break o f f and t h i r d party intervention w i l l r e s u l t , as has so often been the case i n the recent past (1966; 1970). 4 4 I b i d . 1973 . C l i v e McKee, Interview with the Writer, March 1, This brings the e x i s t i n g "state-of-the-art" of B.C.'s fo r e s t industry up to date; now we can turn to the Coast, Sawmilling and Logging, to determine what the future holds i n store. CHAPTER XII B.C. COAST SAWMILL AND LOGGING JOB EVALUATION: HISTORY Having looked at Job Evaluation in Plywood and Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmills, a l o g i c a l p r o j e c t i o n i s to determine i f Job Evaluation i s applicable to the B.C. Coast lumber industry. The sheer si z e of the industry on the Coast (28,000 workers versus 7,000 i n Southern In t e r i o r ) presents a huge stumbling block, but c e r t a i n other considerations indicate to the w r i t e r that Job Evaluation would, indeed, benefi t B.C.'s Coastal opera- t i o n s . One feature stands out above a l l others i n the B.C. Coast lumber industry, namely, the ino r d i n a t e l y high incidence of i n d u s t r i a l c o n f l i c t compared to other industry i n the province. One would expect that a f t e r a quarter of a century of bargaining on a regional scale, union-employer r e l a t i o n s would by th i s time be "n-.t-jre". In fact, however, such r e l a t i o n s are anything b__ -__ure, stable, or harmonious. 1 The disproportionate numbers c.f •••Stuart Jamieson, "Multi-Employer Bargaining: The Case of B.C. Coast Lumber Industry," Relations I n d u s t r i e l l e s . V o l . 26, No. 1, January, 1371, pp. 149-150. s t r i k e p a r t i c i p a n t s and days l o s t i n the industry were to be accounted for mainly by a few large i n t e r e s t ( p o l i t i c a l ) disputes that were subject to l e g a l l y required c o n c i l i a t i o n procedures in the negotiation of new agreements. 2 In the 1960's, however, the increasing incidence of wildcat s t r i k e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the logging sector, indicated that union and management were lo s i n g c o n t r o l of the bargaining process. Preliminary studies were begun i n the e a r l y 1960's, even before Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evalu- atio n was contemplated, r e s u l t i n g in publication of a •a t e n t a t i v e manual in February, 1966. This manual c l o s e l y resembled that of Plywood Evaluation, encompassing four major groupings and ten f a c t o r s . The plan encompassed Sawmilling and Logging. A t o t a l of 600 points were assigned (as opposed to Plywood and Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmills where approximately one-half that number were used) i n the b e l i e f that the many features, more or less s p e c i a l to the industry, could be better incorporated and recognized by the plan. 2 I b i d . , p. 150. 3Job Evaluation Manual for Hourly Paid Jobs i n the Sawmill and Logging Industry of the B.C. "case, February 1966. The i n i t i a l plan was too broad as i t ar_e_rpze_ to resolve many of the sources of c o n f l i c t peculiar to the Coast sector of the industry, including a high incidence of s t r i k e s due to such factors as:^ (1) the large proportion of transient s i n g l e workers employed; (2) the geographic and s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n of workers l i v i n g in one-industry towns or s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s in c i t i e s where they had l i t t l e contact with other occupational groups or classes;. (3) the limited opportunities for a stable family l i f e ; (4) and any other s p e c i a l hardships or l i m i t a - tions associated with work in such in d u s t r i e s . A concensus of sentiment h o s t i l e to employers ( p a r t i c u l a r l y where there were absentee owners) dates back to the t r a d i t i o n of militancy and r a d i c a l ideologies o f the Industrial:.. _ Woodworkers of the.World (I.W.W.). Therefore, no job evaluation scheme could be successful approaching the B.C. Coast lumber industry, which was characterized by a tremendous d i v e r s i t y in jobs, l o c a - t i o n s , conditions, and scale, from a very broad, general d i r e c t i o n as t h i s i n i t i a l plan had attempted. A s c i e n t i f i c approach to such matters as ~zb descriptions, negotiated rates of pay, union structure and j u r i s d i c t i o n , and the appropriate areas for c o l l e c t i r Jamieson, "Bargaining," pp. 150-152. bargaining was r e q u i r e d . 3 Consequently, a second manual was drawn up in A p r i l , 1969 , s t i l l encompassing 600 points but d r a s t i c a l l y a l t e r i n g the d i s t r i b u t i o n of values among the four major groups (see Chapter XIII) and considering sawmilling only. The new manual attempted to consider the s p e c i a l nature of the Coast lumber indu s t r y . "Logging and lumbering operations vary i n s i z e from large camps employing hundreds of men, to small operations employing only a handful. In the former case. There is a high degree of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and d i v i s i o n of labour, with dozens of job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , each paying a d i f - ferent wage according to degree of s k i l l , e t c., while in the smaller operations every worker has to be a s o r t of "jack of a l l trades". Discrepancies are frequent in such s i t u a t i o n s , and give r i s e to disputes and wildcat s t r i k e s . " ' Where there formerly existed a great d i v i s i o n between Coast and I n t e r i o r operations, the gap was r a p i d l y being closed. In previous years logging and lumber operations on the Coast had d i f f e r e d from those in the i n t e r i o r regions of the Province in many respects: c l i m a t i c and topographical conditions, si z e and species of trees, techniques of logging, si z e and scale of saw- 5 I b i d . , pp. 152-153. 6 J o b Evaluation Manual for Hourly Paid Jobs i ~ the Sawmill Industry of the B.C. Coast, A p r i l , 1959. 7Jamieson, "Bargaining," p. 153. m i l l i n g operations, markets, and types of labour e r r t l o y - f . By the l a t e 1960's a growing s i m i l a r i t y had developed in the lumber industry in these d i f f e r e n t regions i n the province, r e s u l t i n g from; improved transportation f a c i l - i t i e s , growing competition in some of the same markets, adoption of s i m i l a r techniques and equipment that favoured large scale operations, and a p r o v i n c i a l government forest p o l i c y that encouraged concentration of operations i n the hands of large integrated concerns. "This growing s i m i l a r i t y and competition were manifested in a protracted s t r i k e of logging and sawmilling workers in Southern I n t e r i o r of B.C. in 1967, in which the central issue was the demand for wage p a r i t y with t h e i r counterparts of the Coast." 9 In the opinion of this writer, that s t r i k e did more than any other sing l e event to provide an impetus for job evaluation i n a l l sectors of B.C.'s lumber industry. The demand for wage p a r i t y in the I n t e r i o r , which would have involved s i g n i f i c a n t wage increases (approximately $1 per hour), was obviously unreasonable from management's point of view, however, i t did serve to stress the need for a technique such as job evaluation to put wag- determin- ation in perspective. Shortly afterwards, the Ir.-erior began i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e i r plan in earnest arc the Coast s t a r t e d to take the issue much more seriously. i <- > 8 i b i d . 9 l b i d . 1 0 L o r n e Fingarson, Interview with the Writer, Feb. 21, 1973. The need for job evaluation on the Coast _~ enhanced by the trend towards growing integration into large concerns in both the Coast and I n t e r i o r sectors. There are p r e v a i l i n g trends in technology and markets, coupled with p r o v i n c i a l government f o r e s t management license p o l i c y , which encourage large concerns to acquire control over an increasing proportion of forest resources. In addition, they are using an increasing share of t h e i r logging output for products other than lumber (e.g., pulp and paper, rayon, hardboard, and other f i b r e s ) . Close integration becomes a t t r a c t i v e when wood chips and slabs from sawmills are used i n the manufacture of such products. This trend tends to generate j u r i s d i c t i o n a l problems leading to pressure for closer cooperation between the I.W.A. and the unions of pulp and paper workers. 1 1 However, while the employers continue to integrate, they have exhibited considerable h o s t i l i t y towards s i m i l a r tendencies on the part of the unions. I t seems l i k e l y therefore, that in the i n t e r e s t s of preservation of t h e i r e x i s t i n g structure, the unions w i l l continue to f i g h t for job evaluation on the B.C. Coast in -lace of union combinations, integration, or competition. Jamieson, "Bargaining," pp. 153-152. Job evaluation could contribute much to =±iev-= a stable and r a t i o n a l climate for c o l l e c t i v e bargaining because of the basic i n s t a b i l i t y of B.C.'s lumber industry. The lumber industry, l i k e construction, is subject to severe seasonal and often unforeseen and e r r a t i c c y c l i c a l fluctuations i n sales, p r i c e s , output, and employment. I r o n i c a l l y , these fluctuations in the lumber industry are a r e s u l t of construction industry fluctuations in many instances. Lumber also faces the hazards of unpre- d i c t a b l e c l i m a t i c conditions that can shut down operations for extended periods. There are too the uncertainties of foreign markets, and a l l i e d changes in import quotas, exchange rates, etc., which have a major impact on an industry that exports three-quarters of i t s output to highly competitive markets. F i n a l l y , there has been a rapid rate of technological change i n both major branches of the industry r e s u l t i n g i n large-scale displacement of labour. These sources of uncertainty and insecurity, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r labour make i t imperative to develop a structure which would produce a more r a t i o n a l and stable climate for c o l l e c t i v e bargaining and the admin- i s t r a t i o n of agreements desired. Job evaluation vs tailor-made for t h i s purpose. l 2 I b i d . , p. 154. H i s t o r i c a l l y , Coast lumber, in collect:.--— bargaining and i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s , has operated within a narrow "orbit of coercive comparison", 1 3 inseparably linked to two other major industries in the province, construction and pulp and paper. Average weighted hourly wage rates in construction have increased from approximately 250 an hour over fo r e s t r y and sawmilling i n 1949, to $1.00 above today. S i m i l a r l y , labour rates i n Coast lumber compare unfavourably with rates in the pulp and paper industry. "While the former group suffers job insecurity, frequent l a y o f f s , and d e c l i n i n g employment opportunities in the long run, the l a t t e r have generally enjoyed stable, year-round operations, and a rapid and almost continuous increase in employment, with favourable prospects for the future. Average hourly rates in pulp and paper have also remained somewhat higher, and have r i s e n at about the same rate as in logging in sawmilling over the past two decades. Where lumber and con- s t r u c t i o n have been "st r i k e prone", pulp and paper has remained r e l a t i v e l y s t r i k e free. The bargaining p o l i c y has been to wait u n t i l negotiations in Coast lumber have been s e t t l e d , with or without a s t r i k e , then to s e t t l e for roughly the same per- centage increases. "I- 4 I t would appear that job evaluation, which takes into con- sid e r a t i o n extraneous influences, industries, j c r categories. 13A.M. Ross and P. Kartmann, Changinc Patterns I n d u s t r i a l C o n f l i c t , New York, I960: c i t e d cn Jamieson, pp. 154-155. 1 4Jamieson, "Bargaining," pp. 157-158. etc., could do much to remove the stigma of lumber workers serving as "stalking h o r s e s " 1 5 for pulp and paper workers, and at the same time avoid c o s t l y s t r i k e s i n the lumber industry i t s e l f . Most union and management spokesmen 1 5 appear to agree that one of the major problems of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining i n B.C. Coast lumber l i e s i n the c o n s t i t u t i o n , organization, and i n t e r n a l p o l i t i c s of the I.W.A.: "The union i s too democratic i n structure and procedures to function e f f e c t i v e l y i n a multi-employer bargaining system, in an industry that is becoming increasingly c e n t r a l i z e d in i t s operations." 1' The c o n s t i t u t i o n of the I.W.A. guarantees a high degree of autonomy among i t s Regional Councils. In turn, there i s a high degree of autonomy among B.C.'s major Locals (9 on the Coast) in r e l a t i o n to the D i s t r i c t Executive. This autonomy i s a d i r e c t r e s u l t of a v a r i e t y IP of f a c t o r s : (1) the co n s t i t u t i o n of the I.W.A. (2) government p o l i c i e s regarding c e r t i f i c a t i o n and decision-making by union l o c a l s (3) the structure of the industry 1 5 I b i d . , p. 158. 1 5 F i e l d notes and interviews (unnamec>. 1 7 Jamieson, "Bargaining," p. 158. 1 8 I b i d . , p. 159. (4) the d i v i s i o n of labour which the structure has created (5) the s p e c i a l t r a d i t i o n s , ideologies, and attitudes of various major occupa- t i o n a l groups in the industry's labour force. In p a r t i c u l a r , there has been a long t r a d i t i o n of a r a d i c a l democratic ideology among the Loggers Local 1-171 (with some 6,000 members between the U.S. border and the A r c t i c C i r c l e ) , together with suspicion of ce n t r a l authority since sawmill workers have tended to dominate the top executive p o s i t i o n s . At one time this a t t i t u d e was expressed as a matter of pride in t h e i r c r a f t as primary workers, and was generally displayed in the form of contempt for inside, processing workers. 1 9 The l a r g e s t l o c a l of the I.W.A. on the B.C. Coast i s 1-217, comprised mainly of sawmill workers i n Vancouver. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , the top executives from th i s strong l o c a l have been even more r a d i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d in ideology and p o l i c y , expressing strong opposition to the D i s t r i c t Executive and running as opposition candidates i n e l e c t i o n s for D i s t r i c t Executive p o s i t i o n s . In b r i e f , the I.W.A. in B.C. is made up of a few large l o c a l unions with strong and outspoken leaders, and a number of smaller, more complaint ones. Thia 1 9 I b i d . structure i n i t s e l f tends to generate intense " f a c i i — — 20 alism" and struggles for power to control p o l i c y at the D i s t r i c t l e v e l . The "internecine" c o n f l i c t s of the I.W.A. are such that the union cannot function with f u l l e f fectiveness in the negotiation or administration of industry-wide c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. In the face of grow- ing c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and integration from the employer side, as described e a r l i e r , the union remains divided, decentral- 21 ized, and disorganized. Job evaluation is a l o g i c a l method, as a natural extension of e x i s t i n g c o l l e c t i v e agreements, for the I.W.A. to function with increased effectiveness in negotiating higher wages for the membership. Evaluators, reporting to the Job Evaluation Joint Committee, w i l l serve to free the top executives from some of the endless bickering and arguing which now surrounds negotiations. By assuming the administrative function, the Evaluators w i l l provide evidence on which concrete, f a i r , and reasonably calculated wage demands can be formulated by the Executive Committee of the I.W.A. Perhaps then i t w i l l be possible to e l i m i n - ate excessive l o s t time spent on r i d i c u l o u s wage demands of the $1.00 to $2.00 per hour variety, such as w__r= made Fingarson, Interview. Jamieson, "Bargaining," pp. 1 6 0 - 1 6 1 . in the summer of 1972, and concentrate instead upon the 25<r to 50£ range where f i n a l settlement i s more l i k e l y to be attained. Some of the most enlightened, p u b l i c - s p i r i t e d c i t i z e n s of B.C. are top executives in the B.C. Coast lumber industry. On the other hand, B.C. lumber executives also include among the i r ranks, some of the most arrogant and reactionary employers that could be found anywhere. A long t r a d i t i o n of e x p l o i t a t i o n of labour and resources has c e r t a i n l y l e f t a residue of senior management personnel, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the larger firms, who are e s s e n t i a l l y a n t i - union in p h i l o s o p h y . 2 2 The industry presents a united front, however, with MacMillan and Bloedel "pulling the 23 s t r i n g s " . As a r e s u l t , F.I.R. has very l i m i t e d r e a l autonomy and control over the p o l i c i e s of i t s members, functioning instead as a "mouthpiece"^ which has li m i t e d e f f e c t i v e n e s s as a bargaining agent. I f the association (F.I.R.) were i t s e l f laying down po l i c y , job evaluation would almost c e r t a i n l y be implemented as i t would make the i r job considerably e a s i e r . In fact, in February 1972, a t h i r d manual was drawn up by F.I.R. i n the hope that 2 2 I b i d . , p. 162. 2 3 F i e l d notes and interviews (unnamed•. 2 4 l b i d . 2 5 I n d u s t r y Proposal for Coast Sawmill Job E v a l u a - t i o n Manual, February 3, 1972. acceptance of job evaluation in B.C. Coast sawmills V E S getting c l o s e r . One of the most unfortunate events in the summer of 1972 negotiations was that job evaluation was "just that close" to being implemented before bargain- or ing broke o f f and the industry went out on s t r i k e . ° 2^Tony VanderKeide and Maurice Walls. interview with the Writer, March 2, 1973. CHAPTER XIII B.C. COAST SAWMILLING AND LOGGING JOB EVALUATION: FACTORS AND WAGE CURVES When Justice Nemetz was c a l l e d in to s e t t l e the Coast f o r e s t r y dispute i n 1966, he recommended that job evaluation be implemented i n sawmilling and logging since i t had proved successful for the Plywood industry. Consequently, F.I.R. and the I.W.A. drew up separate u n i l a t e r a l proposals to suggest ways and means of imple- menting evaluation. The charts, tables, and graphs which follow are based on the F.I.R. plans; the I.W.A. would not d i s c l o s e t h e i r proposals. However, i t appeared that both sides followed c l o s e l y the format used in the P l y - 27 wood Evaluation Manual. F.I.R. drew up nine proposals for Logging Evaluation alone in the period 1966-67. At that time, settlement could not be reached with the I.W.A. on any s i n g l e plan and Logging Evaluation has "flagged" miserably 28 ever since. F i e l d notes and interviews. 2 ^ K e i t h Bennett, Interview with the Writer, December 6, 1972. I t appears to be unanimously agreed that, -re- evaluation i s not s u i t a b l e in the B.C. Coast Logging 29 industry. The nature of the industry creates major obstacles to the standardization and conformity which job evaluatuion attempts to impose: huge geographical area, many non union camps, numerous independent "gypo operators", discrepancies in s i z e of operations, i s o l a t e d nature of the industry, e t c . There i s some evidence that F.I.R. did the great majority of the preliminary work and that the I.W.A. probably never took Logging Job Evaluation too s e r i o u s l y r i g h t from the beginning. The enclosed graphs and tables i l l u s t r a t e the thoroughness with which F.I.R. pursued the subject in the years 1966-1967. The job factors used for Sawmilling and Logging Job Evaluation were i d e n t i c a l and selected i n terms of the general c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the range of jobs to be evaluated. The factors selected for t h i s study were ten in number and f e l l into four major groupings. The 30 groups and factors were as follows: 2 y F r a n k Paul, Interview with the Writer, Karcr 12, 1973. 3 0F.I.R., Job Evaluation Manual for Hrcrly Paid Jobs in the Sawmill and Logging Industry of the B.C. Coast February, 1966. 130 A. Knowledge and S k i l l : factors which indicated a requirement for s p e c i f i c knowledge and s k i l l on the part of the i n d i v i d u a l . (1) Experience (11.67%) (2) Education ( 6.67%) (3) Manual S k i l l (11.67%) B. E f f o r t : factors which took into account the demands of the job in mental and physical e f f o r t . (4) Mental E f f o r t (13.33%) (5) Physical E f f o r t ( 6.67%) C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s : factors in t h i s group covered the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s which were inherent in the performance of the job. (6) R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for Material, Equipment, and Product (19.67%) (7) Safety of Others ( 8.33%) (8) Supervision of Others (10.00%) D. Working Conditions: factors which allowed for the adverse environmental conditions within which the job is performed. (9) Hazards (6.00%) (10) Working Conditions (6.00%) This manual was never acceptable to the I.W.A. because, I r e i t e r a t e , i t t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h too broad a base. Sawmilling and logging are d i f f e r e n t businesses although they are in the same industry group. The manual 31 was revised s l i g h t l y i n 1969 but no major changes were made with the exception that Logging Job Evaluation was dropped altogether. 3 1F.I.R., Job Evaluation Manual for Hocrlv ;-'=id J o b s in the Sawmill Industry on the B.C. C o 2 s _ . J^pri 1 , TABLE : F.I .R.L . LOGGING JOB EVALUATION PLAN WEIGHTINGS PLAN I WEIGHTING PLAN I I PLAN I I I PLAN IV PLAN V Knowledge and S k i l l E f f o r t R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Conditions 35.0 % 21.7 % 30.0 % 13.3 % Knowledge and S k i l l E f f o r t Re spons ib i 1 i ty Conditions 30.0 % 20.0 % 38.0 % 12.0 % Knowledge and S k i l l E f f o r t Re spons i b i l i t y Cond i t i o n s 33.6 % 20.8 % 32.8 % 12.8 % Knowledge and S k i l l E f f o r t R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Conditions 32.3 % 20.0 % 35.4 % 12.3 % Knowledge and S k i l l E f f o r t R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Conditions 36.1 % 20.0 % 31.5 % 12.4 % Source: Keith Bennett (F.I.R.), Proposed Job Evaluation Point Rating System For the B . C . Cos so Logging Industry, February, 1966. TABLE : F.I.R.L. LOGGING JOB EVALUATION EFFECTS ON PRESENT (1967) RATES PLAN (Points) IA (600) IB (600) IIA (600) IIB (600) IIIA (625) IIIB (625) IVA (650) VA (650) VC (65 0) Number of Jobs Up Number of Jobs Down (%) 12 24 19 26 19 26 27 27 •i '.i (31.6) (63.2) (50.0) (68.4) (50.0) (68.4) (71.0) (71.0) (76.3) 23 12 16 10 16 10 (60.5) (31.6) (42.1) (26.3) (42.1) (26.3) (23.7) (23.7) (18.4) Number of Jobs Remaining Same (%) 3 (7.9) 2 (5.2) 3 (7.9) 2 (5.3) 3 (7.9) 2 (5.3) 2 (5.3) 2 (5.3) 2 (5.3) TOTAL (100%) 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 \ n u , ^ ' f l L Keith Bennett (F.I.R.), Proposed Job Evaluation Point Rating System For The B.C. Coast Logging Industry, February, 1966. T7 T r> T T r ^ p T " . " . TOA i 7 ALU AT 10-1 - _-\.--'J-J - _ 1 • / _jjr-i 1 - 1 . - J . . i • "' I ! PLAiT (Points) ' IG;0vi___G_ L SKILL EFFORT R3370S3I3ILITY CCLDIi'IO-o 1 ( 5 0 0 ) | E d . % of T O _ 3.1 % of liar. - _1 Physical To__l :•!__' i 3uo, _0__1 , — _ ! A d v . r ^ T ^ a i 30 6 0 70 35 90 40 21.7 70 50 6 0 30 40 ". i — J ( 6 0 0 ) j 1 3 0 5 0 70 35 90 40 21,7 70 50 6 0 5 0 30 33 40 4 0 j 13.3 A ( £ 0 0 ) "j | 7 0 | 4 0 ; J . 30 . 30 40 20 , 0 113 50 35. 35 12,0 | | 3 (600) 7 0 1 4 0 j 7 0 J ' i 30 30' 4 0 20,0 113- 5 0 6 0 33 35 35 j 12.0 | A ( 6 2 5 ) ) | 3 0 5 0 7 0 33.6 90 40 20.3 95 50 6 0 32.3 40 -r J | 1 2 . 0 1 3 ( 6 2 5 ) j ^ | 3 0 5 0 70 33.6. 90 40 20.3 95 50 6 0 32.3 40 40 12.3 i A ( 6 5 0 ) ] T £ j 3 0 6 0 70 32.3 90 40 20 . 0 120 50 6 0 35.4 '40 40 12.3 A ( 6 5 0 ) | 3 0 6 0 95 35 .1 90 40 20.0 95 50 60 31.5 40 40 12.4 j C ( 6 5 0 ) j " 5 " 3 0 ' 5 0 95 3 6 . 1 90 40 20 = 0 95 50 60 31.5 40 40 12 ,4 j It 'I !i \ ij W A G E JOB E V A L U A T I O N P I L O T S T R U C T U R E F O R B . C . C O A S T P R O J E C T L O G G I N G I N DIM T ? Y J u n e 15, is--" G r a d e P o i n t R a n ere A B C_ _D_ 1 0 - 61 2.76 2.76 2.76 2 .76 62- 71 2.81 2. 82 2. 82 2 .81 3 . 72- 81 2. S o 2.88 2. 88 2 .86 : 4 82- 91 2.91 2.94 2. 94 2 .91 5 92-101 2. 96 3. 00 3. 00 2 .96 6 102-111 3. 01 3. 06 3. 06 3 . 01 7 112-121 3. 06 3. 12 3. 12 3 . 06 8 122-131 3. 11 3. 18 3. 18 3 . 11 9 132-141 3. 16 3. 24 3. 24 3 . 16 10 142-151 3.21 3. 30 3. 30 3 . 21 11 152-161 3. 27 3. 36 3. 38 3, . 27 12 162-171 3. 33 3. 42 3.46 3, . 33 13 172-181 3 . 39 3. 48 3. 55 3, . 39 14 182-191 3.45 3. 54 3. 64 3. .45 15 192-201 3.51 3.60 3.73 3. . 51 16 202-211 3. 57 3.66 3. 82 3. . 57 17 212-221 3. 63 3.72 3. 92 3. 65 18 222-231 3. 69 3.78 4. 02 3. 73 19 232-241 3.75 3. 84 4. 12 3. 81 20 242-251 3.81 3. 90 4. 22 3. 89 21 252-261 3. 87 3. 96 4. 33 3. 97 22 262-271 3.93 4. 02 4. 44 4. 05 2 3 272-281 3.99 4. 08 4 . 4. 13 282-291 4 . 05 4. 14 ZZ 4_ 21 '• 2 5 2 9 2 - 3 0 1 4. 1 1 4 . 20 4 . 7 3 4. 29 2D 302-311 4 . 17 4. 26 4 . 9 0 4. 37 27 312-321 4 . 23 4. 32 5. 02 4 . 45 28 322-331 4. 29 4 . 3 8 5. 15 4 . 53 29 332-341 4. 35 4. 4 4 5. 28 4 . 6 1 135 _ _I-..L_, J _ L J_L_ s : 7. - -- -- w '><< 3 V .... b T <• i fv. if - .0 fl F -< c c F i 1 : L JO T C r I*- Pi > I1 L C a ? J V •V > - IV V It 5 t I _ . . J J . . .... .J..L i . . L J I . ; i ! ...i_L. — Z ! _ V " : ; : f L t I ' l l , • j | - _„ i i - - - ---- - - - ... - - - - — - -- -- - -- - - - -- - -- - - - -- -- - - _ - i - -..!_. ••-!- - - -- - - - - - - -- 1 i - - -- - -- --- - - -_ --- -- - ... _ - ------ - -- -- - - --- - - _ - - - - — ... - — - - - - -- - -- - -- 0 - - - 7 - ---- - - --- - - - - -- - - - / - / K _ _ — - -- - - - • -- -- - - —4 XI \Q 0 5 - ---- - - --- - ---- - --| t - / 1 ! i a: ,/> h _ - -- -- -- / 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - -- -- — -- - - i • . 1 : i i ! I I I ! i ! 1 1 1 > - i j • i J _ : s 1 , ] s - -- i' 2 ~ 2 _ - ... - ---- - - - -- -- - - - _ — ; 1 ' • , i I 1 . ! ! 1 .. -f-H-r 1 1 ! !.. !44 : • I i i _ i J i -I- i X i ! ! ! —i——• i : I i i i j - ~ r • i i ! I > i ' i i X l X L - -- _ _ - ---- _ .I1 - — :F ... — _ . '. 1 U-U_J L _ i_ • _ , j — * - i i * i T ~"i— - -- - - - - - •- ! i 1 1 • i l l - _ J.- 1 IU. -— -i X _ -4-i -- -- — -- ... - - -- ---- ---- ! - 1 1 L_jJL. • i + — — - uJ_J-1 1 - _l_Li i—i 1 i i 1 I t i 1 1 i - L.. 1 ! J i 1 !. _Li FT u x l x 1 1. i_ .L I l i i .J_LU. MM] sin: 2jX So A ire' V-fUfTv. 4:: i " CD .0 ST _b <JG xcy. _!_]- J_L ILL Z 2 7 7 •*K-T -1? 4u V Z_ 5 _u.. y _ jL i _ u L _L : - i - 4 - i T T - l n - r 7- ~~i I i I j t 1 »~ m J J_L I i X ~ " i ; j . . .P.B. ..LL _LLL ! J. • I. _i_ !__L _ U . J X . L *.-f—>—i —1—t— 1 itctt ttndziz i r r .i_i_L .LL-.M-LL|X At the time of wri t i n g another Manual"^" :.=• being prepared, but point values, degrees, wage curve, e t c . have not been established. The proposed Manual d i f f e r s s l i g h t l y from i t s predecessors of 1966 and 33 1969. A d e s c r i p t i o n of the factors and groups follows: A. Knowledge and s k i l l f a c t o r s . J ° k Knowledge: measures minimum time required to obtain s p e c i a l i z e d or p r a c t i c a l knowl- edge i n necessary related positions and/ or t echnical schooling. (2) On-the-job Experience: measures the minimum time required to develop a reasonable standard of "on-the-job" performance. (3) Manual S k i l l : measures dexterity, a g i l i t y , eye-hand coordination, and the s k i l l to use p r e c i s i o n t o o l s . B. E f f o r t f a c t o r s . (4) Physical E f f o r t : measures the i n t e n s i t y of the p h y s i c a l e f f o r t required (5) V i s u a l E f f o r t : measures v i s u a l exertion requ ired. (6) Judgment: measures the requirements of the job for the exercise of resourcefulness and independent judgment. C. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f a c t o r s . (7) Product R e s p o n s i b i l i t y : evaluates the extent to which i t i s important that a worker perform in a co n s i s t e n t l y responsible manner in respect to the u t i l i z a t i o n of raw materials and the q u a l i t y of the product. ( 8) Process Respons i b i l i t y : evaluates tr,e extent to which i t i s important ~o.a_ a worker perform in a c o n s i s t e n t l v 3 2 F . I . R . , Industry Proposal for Coast Sawmill Jc'r Svaluation Manual, February 3, 1972. 3 3 I b i d . responsible manner i n order to c o n t r i - bute to the e f f i c i e n c y of the process. This factor recognizes that a worker may in c e r t a i n jobs perform in such a manner so as to obtain superior r e s u l t s , not just by avoiding mistakes, but also by improving that part of the process which i s under his c o n t r o l . A l l workers covered by evaluation are considered to be as playing a part in the process. (9) Equipment: measures the importance of the equipment and i t s s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to damage. (10) Safety of Others: measures the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for avoiding injury to others. (11) "'Contacts with Others ; measures the extent and frequency of contacts with others both i n t e r n a l l y and ex t e r n a l l y . D. Working Conditions Factors. (12) Personal Hazards: measures the l e v e l of personal hazards. (13) Personal Discomforts: measures the personal discomforts r e s u l t i n g from disagreeable elements (e.g., heat, cold, damp, noise, dust, and fumes). The new Manual is d e f i n i t e l y reminiscent of the Southern I n t e r i o r Manual, rather than the Plywood Manual to which the previous Coast proposals were r e l a t e d . Using t h i r t e e n factors rather than ten indicates recognition of the more s p e c i a l i z e d aspects of Sawmilling, i n p a r t i c u l a r , the need for recognition of Visual E f f o r t and eye-to-hand coordination. Sawmilling and Plywood are c e r t a i n l y more representative of manufacturing a c t i v i t i e s than is log-ring which i s more resource e x t r a c t i v e . The development of the Sawmill Job Evaluation Wage Curve for the B.C. Coast presents an int e r e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n . The o r i g i n a l curve, which was decided ur.cr. 34 i n June, 1957, has not been tampered with. The reason for t h i s appears to be because the great majority of new proposals for B.C. Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation never reach t h i s stage (determination of a suit a b l e wage curve). However, I was assured recently that when Job Evaluation i n B.C. Coast Sawmills is implemented, the curve w i l l be i d e n t i c a l to, or resemble very strongly, the wage curve which ex i s t s a t present (see table and graph which follow) This implies then, that a percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l wage curve is not forthcoming as job evaluation plans presently e x i s t with respect to Coast sawmills. However, to i l l u s t r a t e the d i v e r s i t y of opinion regarding percentage wage d i f f e r - e n t i a l , another knowledgeable gentleman hinted that a percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l wage curve might be included i n 3 5 I.W.A. demands f o r 1974 contract negotiations. This demand would of course be r e l i a n t on the I.W.A.'s serious p u r s u i t of Job Evaluation i n Coast sawmills during those negotiations. Regardless of these issues, the wage curve as i t e x i s t s at p r e s e n t — w i t h 50 increments between grades 3 4 p r a n j c paul, Interview with the Writer, >arch 1973 . I b i d . 3 6 L o r n e Fingarson, Interview with the Writer, March 1, 1973. one and ten, 60 increments between grades eleven ar.f sixteen, and 80 increments between grades seventeen and twenty-nine—is t o t a l l y unacceptable to the I.W.A. Therefore, i t seems l i k e l y that management may be forced to accept a percentage d i f f e r e n t i a l wage curve for Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation i f evaluation i s ever to be mutually agreeable. TABLE : GRADE-RATE-CHART COAST SAWMILL EVALUATION Cents Above Wage Based On Grade Base Rate 1972 Rates 1 50 $4.13% 2 50 $4.18% 3 50 $4.23% 4 50 $4.28% 5 50 $4.33% 6 50 $4.38% 7 50 $4.43% 8 50 $4.48% 9 50 $4.53% 10 50 $4.58% 11 60 $4.64% 12 60 $4.70% 13 60 $4.76% 14 60 $4.82% 15 60 $4.88% 16 60 $4.94% 17 80 $5.02% 18 80 $5.10% 19 80 $5.18% 20 80 $5.26% 21 80 $5.34% 22 80 $5.42% 23 80 $5.50% 24 80 $5.58% 25 80 $5.66% 26 80 $5.74% $5.82% 27 80 28 80 $5.90% 29 80 $5.98% Source: Frank Paul, Interview with the writer, March 1973.  CHAPTER XIV B.C. COAST SAWMILLING & LOGGING JOB EVALUATION: ANALYSIS One major obstacle looms large before job evaluation can be extended to other 'sectors of the fo r e s t industry i n B r i t i s h Columbia. This considera- t i o n i s cost; the expense to "run" evaluation as compared with the be n e f i t s which job evaluation promises. I b e l i e v e the question of costs to be the single biggest t e s t of a c c e p t a b i l i t y v/hich job evaluation faces with respect to implementation on the B.C. Coast. As was stated i n Chapter VI, Plywood Job Evaluation implementation cost i n the v i c i n i t y of $70,000; Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation about $250,000. Conservative estimates for the B.C. Coast have run between $500,000 and $1,000,OOO.37 S i m i l a r l y , the annual expense of running and administering such an evaluation program would probably range between $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 and $50,000 for each s i d e . 3 8 F i e l d notes and interviews. writer, I n i t i a l l y , i n the Southern I n t e r i o r , the I.F.L.R.A. f e l t that 6.90 per man per hour would be a t o l e r a b l e l e v e l i f job evaluation could be implemented a t that cost. What resulted was a cost of 4.70 per man per hour. As a r e s u l t , the B.C. Coast management a s s o c i - ation, F.I.R., i s looking at a 50 per man per hour cost as a maximum t o l e r a b l e l e v e l for the implementation of •a q job evaluation i n B.C. Coast sawmills. A further serious hindrance to the implementa- t i o n of B.C. Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation is the at t i t u d e o f the I.W.A. The union's o f f i c i a l opinion i s that evaluation is not acceptable on the C o a s t . 4 0 Though i t s t i l l has a contractual o b l i g a t i o n to study job evalua- t i o n , the I.W.A. fee l s they want to wait u n t i l the Plywood and Southern I n t e r i o r plans are completely straightened out. I b e l i e v e the reasoning behind the I.W.A. strategy i s twofold. F i r s t , the nature of the industries on the Coast and i n the I n t e r i o r is d i f f e r e n t as explained e a r l i e r , with the Coast cutting larger, better q u a l i t y timber which i n turn requires a more complex job evalu- ation plan. Second, the Coast i s generally characterized by a more m i l i t a n t membership which makes the l o c a l j y K e i t h Bennett, Interview with the Writer, December 6, 1972. 4 0Tony VanderKeide and Maurice Walls, Interview with the Writer, March 2, 1973. leadership hesitant to r e l i n q u i s h t h e i r autonomy — the Regional Council who would bring in Evaluators to assume a large r o l e i n the c o l l e c t i v e bargaining process. From th i s perspective, i t is cl e a r that job evaluation can, i f a l l parties agree, be dealt with by j o i n t consultation and c o l l e c t i v e bargaining, whatever the machinery set up for these purposes. Indeed, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to see how, i n cases where such machinery e x i s t s and operates e f f e c t i v e l y , job evaluation could ever be applied as a means of u n i l a t e r a l wage-fixing by the employer. S i m i l a r l y , with adequate representation a t the l o c a l union l e v e l , i t is improbable that the Regional Council could make s i g n i f i c a n t inroads on l o c a l autonomy. The "climate" of bargaining in the Coast lumber industry has thus far i n h i b i t e d both sides in t h e i r e f f o r t s to introduce job evaluation. Labour-management r e l a t i o n s have been characterized by a considerable degree o f mutual suspicion and h o s t i l i t y . These attitudes are exacerbated by the basic i n s t a b i l i t y of the industry and the insecu r i t y i t generates. For instance, the I.W.A. views F.I.R.'s e f f o r t s with respect to job evalua- t i o n as "too conservative"; a r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of the vage d o l l a r according to l i m i t s prescribed by h i s t o r i c a l wage 41 patterns. On the other hand, the employers f e e l that Wyman Trineer, Interview with the Writer, February 22, 1973. job evaluation can suc c e s s f u l l y provide the basis for p r o d u c t i v i t y measures (by comparison between pl a n t s ) , and generate a standardization of functions throughout 42 the industry, both of which the I.W.A. are against. A b e n e f i t which each side is overlooking i s that of job t r a i n i n g . Provisions for study and imple- mentation of job t r a i n i n g programs have been made in several contracts. However, the job t r a i n i n g program never r e a l l y got o f f the ground because there has never been a formal mechanism which gives impetus to i t s organization. I believe job evaluation can provide that impetus through the use of job description, apprentice programs, and the l i k e . The problem, as seen by the I.W.A., involves changing from a s e n i o r i t y based wage system to one based on competence. However, with the disappearance of the "old-timers" and the labour shortage i n the industry today, that problem should be overcome. The h i s t o r i c a l issue of the company determin- ing competency, when they have not been involved in t r a i n i n g , w i l l also be i r r e l e v a n t as both sides are now involved in the formal decision process. Considerable speculation has been circuiaaarig with respect to government p a r t i c i p a t i o n in B.C.. "cast Sawmill Job Evaluation. Under the twenty year regime 4 2 F r a n k Paul, Interview with the Writer, Decembe 1972. of the S o c i a l Credit Party, p r o v i n c i a l government p o l i c y was amorphous and contradictory and, on balance, favour- able to the employers at the expense of the u n i o n . 4 3 As described e a r l i e r , the p o l i c y of f o r e s t management licences encourages concentration of the industry and i t s resources in the hands of a few large integrated concerns. To date, the N.D.P. has not s i g n i f i c a n t l y altered this r e l a t i o n - ship. In the past, the requirements for union c e r t i f i c a - t i o n and c o l l e c t i v e bargaining m i l i t a t e d against e f f e c t i v e industry-wide negotiations. Under the terms of the Labour Relations Act of 1954, which was superseded by the Media- t i o n Commission Act of 1969, the regional organization or d i s t r i c t of the I.W.A. had no l e g a l status as such. C e r t i f - i c a t i o n of appropriate bargaining units applied only to l o c a l unions and l o c a l companies, or t h e i r plants. There- fore negotiations between union and management were designed to a r r i v e at the notorious "memorandum of agreement" which set out mutually acceptable wage rates, hours of work, etc., the terms of which had to be r a t i f i e d by the 44 employers and employees of i n d i v i d u a l companies or plants. 4 J S t u a r t Jamieson, "Multi-Employer Bar-gaining: the Case of B.C. Coast Lumber Industry," Relations I n d u s t r i e l l e s I n d u s t r i a l Relations, V o l . 26, No. 1, January, 1971, p. 152. 4 4 I b i d _ . , p. 153. The e f f e c t which the N.D.P. government's Mediation Services Act of 1972, and subsequent l e g i s l a - t i o n , w i l l have on the system of industry-wide bargain- ing remains an open question. Certainly i t w i l l decrease the undermining of orderly bargaining on a regional s c a l e . The i n v e s t i t u r e of the main powers of decision-making in the hands of the main employer firms and union l o c a l s w i l l be stopped. These powers, p a r t i c u l a r l y as regards s t r i k e or lockout action, have tended to exacerbate internecine d i v i s i o n s and c o n f l i c t s within the ranks of union and employer organizations a l i k e . As evidence of t h i s , there are the N.D.P.'s avowed "headhunting" of major producers ( i . e . , MacMillan-Bloedel), and the p r o v i n c i a l government's recent problems with the B.C. Federation of Labour. The N.D.P. has had to depend upon organized labour as i t s main base for popular support. The large but disorganized I.W.A., which has accounted for a d i s - proportionate share of the province's labour unrest, was a d e f i n i t e p o l i t i c a l asset to the Socreds who presented themselves to business and the voting public as the only force capable of saving the province from domination by an " i r r e s p o n s i b l e " labour movement. J The "bulvars against s o c i a l i s m " argument was f i n a l l y voted c i t of Ibid., pp. 163-164. power in July, 1972. However, I believe the vote a r e j e c t i o n of the Socreds rather than a mandate for the N.D.P. Therefore, a "strong, well-organized and coordinated lumber workers' union firmly established i n the province's major resource-based industry, would provide a major source of support and a r a l l y i n g point, 46 p o t e n t i a l l y , for an organized labour movement'V that would give the N.D.P. a firm, long-term foundation. The problem remains, then, for the p r o v i n c i a l government t o promote t h i s organization and coordination i n the I.W.A. Over the past twenty years i n p a r t i c u l a r , the industry has undergone almost revolutionary changes in technology, structure and organization, as well as in government p o l i c i e s and regulations. Among the more important of these changes have been: the s u b s t i t u t i o n o f logging by truck rather than by railway; the rapid mechanization and automation of logging and sawmill operations, with increases in c a p i t a l investment per worker, in output per man hour, and a d e c l i n i n g volume of employment in both sectors of the industry; a n d . f i n a l l y , the growing concentration and integrate r ~ c f the industry.4 7 4 6 I b _ i d . , p. 163. 4 7 I b i d . , p. 165. I t is d i f f i c u l t , however, to discern any s i g n i f i c a n t impact of such developments on the organiza- t i o n a l structure, ideology, or p o l i c i e s of the I.W.A.; on employer attitudes or p o l i c i e s v i s - a - v i s the union; on the pattern of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining,- or on the frequency or incidence of c o n f l i c t i n the i n d u s t r y . 4 8 Therefore, I consider i t of paramount importance that job evaluation, in the absence of other s u i t a b l e mechanisms, be implemented to assess and improve the e f f i c i e n c y of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining, and to increase technical e f f i c i e n c y in production in the form of lower costs, higher p r o f i t s , and a b i l i t y to survive and grow i n highly competitive markets. One acceptable, but perhaps over-simple c r i t e r i o n of e f f i c i e n c y in c o l l e c t i v e bargaining i s the a b i l i t y of the union to protect and enhance the i n t e r e s t s of i t s members, as measured by the achievement o f such things as increased job security, and wage and fringe b e n e f i t increases in l i n e with those of workers i n comparable industries ( i . e . , construction and pulp and paper), without incurring disproportionate losses from s t r i k e s and lockouts. The achievement of such gains depends on strength and cohesiveness from the curcc-- s i c e and f l e x i b i l i t y on the employer s i d e . 4 9 4 8 i b i d . 4 9 I b i d . , pp. 165-166. On the premises outlined, I suggest th__ the p r o v i n c i a l government, s p e c i f i c a l l y Labour Minister B i l l King, might be approachable with respect to a c o s t - sharing plan c a l l i n g for implementation of Job Evaluation in the B.C. Coast Sawmill Industry as of the next contract date, June 15, 1974. Indeed, the "economic health of the province and the public i n t e r e s t depends on how r e a l i s t i c - a l l y they -(management and union) are prepared to be when 50 they face each other across the bargaining t a b l e . " In addition, government p a r t i c i p a t i o n would serve to reduce the employers' contribution per man hour, thereby s i g n i f i c a n t l y reducing the problem of a r r i v i n g at an acceptable tolerance l e v e l . I believe that the a l t e r n a t i v e to job evaluation w i l l be a r b i t r a t i o n : "Four times i n the l a s t 13 years d i r e c t negotiations have gone so badly that a s p e c i a l mediator had to be appointed to, in e f f e c t , t e l l both sides what the settlement should be. Mr. Justice Nemetz has done so on the l a s t two occasions. I t ' s doubtful i f he'd be a v a i l a b l e again, even i f he were acceptable to the two s ides. Indeed the s p e c i a l mediator techni- que can only work so often before i t s usefulness diminishes. The pressure v i l l be much greater t h i s year on union and company negotiators to s e t t l e t h e i r d i f - ferences without outside h e l p . " 5 1 5 0The Vancouver Sun, February 26, 1972. 5 1 I b i d . This a r b i t r a t i o n might be forthcoming .in. t r j a 52 form of voluntary a r b i t r a t i o n i f the two sides can r e c o n c i l e some of th e i r d i f f e r e n c e s . However, the union does not seem to be firmly united on the question of how to conduct i t s a f f a i r s . An a r b i t r a t o r could be named we l l in advance of the contract expiry date so that no time loss in getting an acceptable settlement could be achieved. ..The.right person to mediate between the pa r t i e s has been found before i n the f o r e s t industry and has 53 produced a s a t i s f a c t o r y agreement. A second questionable a l t e r n a t i v e has a l l ready been examined. The federal government was approached i n 1970 5 4 through the Manpower Department. They refused to consider an a p p l i c a t i o n for funding the Southern 55 I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation for several reasons: (1) Job evaluation existed and was working we l l in plywood. (2) There was no p r o v i s i o n in government regulations or l e g i s l a t i o n to provide funds f o r such a project. (3) The public i n t e r e s t was not deemed to be at stake. Clive McKee, Interview with the Writer, Karrch 1, 1973. 5 3The Vancouver Sun, June 28, 1972. J s tFingarson, Interview. 5 5 I b i d . However, I believe that a r e - a p p l i c a t i o n might be f e a s i b l e with respect to Coast Sawmill Job Evaluation for two reasons. The public i n t e r e s t is at stake on the Coast as four times as many workers are involved; the L i b e r a l s are now in the p o s i t i o n of r u l i n g through a minority government and are subsequently proving to be much more approachable and receptive to proposals from Western Canada where they won a t o t a l of four seats in 1972's general e l e c t i o n . In summarizing, the p o t e n t i a l benefits from job evaluation are greater on the Coast than anywhere e l s e i n B.C. The s i z e and expense of the project present major stumbling blocks. However, government p a r t i c i p a - t i o n , preferably on the p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l , could overcome the problems of expense and, at the same time, promote s t a b i l i t y i n the industry while broadening the appeal and popular support for that government. CHAPTER XV SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The p r i n c i p a l purpose of this chapter i s to suggest some of the more general implications of t h i s study and in so doing, to present a summary of the major r e s u l t s . At the beginning of the f i r s t chapter, three r e l a t e d objectives were set f o r t h . To r e i t e r a t e , the o b j e c t i v e s were formulated as questions aimed at c l a r - i f y i n g three aspects of job evaluation as i t applies to the f o r e s t industry i n B r i t i s h Columbia. (1) Is job evaluation worthwhile as a technique in labour-management r e l a t i o n s ? (2) How can job evaluation be conducted and implemented? (3) Can job evaluation be extended to a l l sectors of the industry? Perhaps the major conclusion which emerges from the study i s that job evaluation has proved success boi in the Plywood industry, is proving s a t i s f a c t o r y :r. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmills, and has tremendous po t e n t i a l benefits for B.C. Coast sawmills. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , lob evaluatic has succeeded, as a technique, in replacing "confronta- t i o n " i n f o r e s t negotiations with an approach more consistent with good "human r e l a t i o n s " : 1 "You are never going to make the work force happy. Never. But you can do a great deal to bring both sides into harmony. The time has come to get r i d of a l l the role-playing on the part of management and labour and to throw out the bargaining table con- frontation-type mentality." 2 Therefore, i t appears that the most important immediate s i n g l e benefit to be derived from implementation of job evaluation i s that of responsible bargaining i n the process of wage determination. The h i s t o r y of labour- management r e l a t i o n s in B r i t i s h Columbia has been very poor, but the h i s t o r y of labour-management r e l a t i o n s in the forest industry in p a r t i c u l a r has been calamitous. This can be at t r i b u t e d to a v a r i e t y of factors from the past . . . the past h i s t o r y of c e r t a i n companies, person- a l i t i e s from the past who s t i l l dominate management and labour. In p a r t i c u l a r , the f o r e s t industry represents one of the l a s t strongholds of a philosophy s i m i l a r to that of the "robber barons", so many of the union- management r e l a t i o n s h i p s are highly personal, going back x C l i v e McKee, Interview with the writer, Marco. 1, 1973. 2 C l i v e McKee, The Vancouver Sun, December 19, 1972, p. 6. for an unbelievable number of years. The frequency r f "personality wars" that creep into negotiations i s shocking."^ To i l l u s t r a t e the effectiveness of systems akin to job evaluation, and job evaluation i t s e l f for that matter, one need only look as far as Sweden. Sv/edish labour-management r e l a t i o n s and c o l l e c t i v e bargaining are gene r a l l y considered to be as enlightened as any in the world. Management and labour confront each other as two strongly organized f o r c e s — a stable balance of power. They meet with an unusual degree of mutual confidence, not only i n negotiating t h e i r differences, but also i n creating j o i n t machinery for peace in the labour market and se c u r i t y i n areas of common i n t e r e s t . 4 The two major organizations involved are the Swedish Employers' Confederation (S.A.F.), consisting of 43 a f f i l i a t e d associations in the p r i v a t e sector of industry with 24,000 members employing 1,250,000 persons, and the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (L.O.), com- prised of 29 national trade unions and 2,700 l o c a l s with 1,650,000 members including more than 90% of a l l rLce- c o l l a r workers. Close estimates put forest incest—_~ workers at 104,000 in I960. 6 3 I b i d . 4The Swedish I n s t i t u t e , Fact Sheets on Sweden, 1970, p. 1. 5 I b i d . 6T.L. Johnston, C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining in Sweden, All e n & Unwin Ltd., London, 1962, pp. 343-346. The wage negotiation procedure i s e s s e n t i a l l y as follows: L.O. and S.A.F. reach a c e n t r a l agreement on a recommendation to th e i r a f f i l i a t e s concerning the average s i z e of wage increases as we l l as improvements which s p e c i f i c groups should receive, such as changes i n work hours, fringe benefits, and the l i k e . Thereafter, the national unions and t h e i r opposites in S.A.F. negoti- ate l e g a l l y binding c o l l e c t i v e agreements based on L.O.- S.A.F. recommendations. When nation-wide contracts have been concluded for the d i f f e r e n t industries, negotiations ensue on the l o c a l l e v e l concerning the a p p l i c a t i o n of the industry's national agreement to the plant and i t s work process, a procedure rendered necessary i n most 7 industries by the widespread use of piece r a t e s . Piecework methods of wage payment i n Sweden's for e s t industry take the form of l i n e a r piece rates which are generally geared s o l e l y to quantitative units of out- put. These rates are mostly i n d i v i d u a l piece rates with schedules rooted in time-honoured t r a d i t i o n s and not based on work studies. In recent years, however, work studies have been i n i t i a t e d extensively in order to S e f f e c t a r e v i s i o n of the whole piece rate schedule. 'Martin Schnitzer, The Economy of Sweden, Praeger, New York, 1970, p. 203. S I b i d . , p. 207. Revision was undertaken because, during rhe period 1960-67, world market p r i c e s of goods produced in the f o r e s t r y sector increased at a rate of 1 to 1.5 per cent a year. At the same time, average p r o d u c t i v i t y i n the sector increased at a rate of 7.5 per cent a year. However, t o t a l wage costs in the f o r e s t r y sector increased at a rate of 9.4 per cent a year. This indicated that i n d u s t r i a l p r o f i t a b i l i t y in the sector had f a l l e n and solvency had been weakened during the period. Although the i n t e r n a t i o n a l competitive capacity of industry in manufacturing a c t i v i t i e s was maintained, i t was at the expense of p r o f i t a b i l i t y , which declined, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n i n d u s t r i e s such as f o r e s t r y which produced raw materials and semi-manufactured goods. 9 Beginning i n 1968, Sweden experienced an increase in s t r i k e s as p r o f i t a b i l i t y was strengthened (to stimulate investment) by narrowing the scope for wage increases. Accordingly, a greater i n t e r e s t in the use of work study, job evaluation, method-time measurement, merit rating, and performance wage set t i n g was evoked. Systematic job evaluation i s nov/ being c~sd extensively in the forest industry in Sweden. A l l the schemes have been applied l o c a l l y , and j o i n t l y by manage- ment and workers. The Swedish systems developed so far 9 I b i d . , p. 211. mainly use a points system, and the q u a l i t i e s of p a r t i c u l jobs are weighted j o i n t l y in the attempt to f i n d a measur ir.g rod for judging the r e l a t i v e requirements of jobs wren wages are being a l l o c a t e d . This assessment of jobs i s egooma separate from negotiations about the a l l o c a t i o n of the wage b i l l and the rate at which payment for d i f f - erent jobs is graduated. I t does not replace wage bargai ing, but i s intended to provide i t with a more precise b a s i s of knowledge about jobs and t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 1 Complementary to job evaluation, which implies payment for the job according to the job requirements, i s merit r a t i n g , payment for the job on the basis of i n d i v i d u a l performance. Merit r a t i n g is not regarded as a substitute for payment by r e s u l t s , but rather as an aid to finding more precise measures on which to base d i f f e r e n t i a t e d payment by performance. 1 1 The Swedish system holds two lessons for B.C.'s forest industry: (1) Job evaluation i s a useful technique in f a c i l i t a t i n g responsible c o l l e c t i v e bar- gaining. However, the Swedish system also r e l a t e s to p r o d u c t i v i t y . Produc- t i v i t y increases were, in the i n i t i a l stages, a primary objective of management and union when job evaluation was imple- mented i n the B.C. f o r e s t industry. In 1 0Johnston, Sweden, pp. 249-250. 1 3-Ibid., p. 250. the interim, however, productivity appears to have "gone by the board" as the "end-all" objective now appears to be harmonious i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s arb c o l l e c t i v e bargaining at any cost. (2) ;-:erit r a t i n g , when used i n conjunction with job evaluation, can be a u s e f u l t o o l for performance measurement of i n d i v i d u a l s . I f management s i n c e r e l y desires to incorporate p r o d u c t i v i t y in the c o l l e c t i v e agreement, job evalua- t i o n , through merit r a t i n g , i s one of the vehicles which can accomplish the task. In the absence of a system of c o l l e c t i v e bargain- ing such as that of Sweden's, improvement of labour- management r e l a t i o n s in B.C.'s forest industry n e c e s s a r i l y e n t a i l s the preparation of a structure and groundwork for negotiations. They must be handled on a continuous, day- by-day basis by s p e c i a l i s t s l i k e Job Evaluators who can communicate and i d e n t i f y with the objectives and nature of the f o r e s t industry in Plywood and Sawmilling. Today, i n an era of technological change, the cost of a s t r i k e to everybody involved and to s o c i e t y as a whole i s enormous. Nowhere i s t h i s i l l u s t r a t e d more poignantly than i n the forest industry i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Whether technological change i s introduced or not, manage- ment i s s t i l l responsible to the shareholders for managing in the most e f f i c i e n t ways possible. This involves improv- ing methods and procedures, some of which are not necessarily anything to do with employees, most of which are not b a s i c a l l y t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . On the other hand, the I.W.A. i s sometimes concerned with the amount of grower i t can exert i n a given s i t u a t i o n — o r to put i t another way, is permitted to exert within a given set of c i r - cumstances. Often, t h i s i s b a s i c a l l y because management has concentrated too much upon other aspects of i t s business and not nearly enough on i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s for employee-employer r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Job evaluation represents i n part an attempt by employers and the union to create i d e n t i f i c a t i o n among employees, to help them b u i l d a r e l a t i o n s h i p to the f i e l d and the technology in which they work. This does not happen when each side s i t s dovm at the bargain- ing t a b l e . I t has to be worked on continuously by s p e c i a l i s t s such as Evaluators who can f a c i l i t a t e the negotiating and bargaining processes by constantly r e - evaluating and r e v i s i n g inequities i n wage structure. One of the biggest obstacles to job evaluation i s i t s cost. Plywood Evaluation was a r e s u l t of the endless b i c k e r i n g and negotiation in that sector in the m i d - f i f t i e s . S i m i l a r l y , during the l a t e - s i x t i e s , worker i n I n t e r i o r sawmills began an incessant clamour for wage p a r i t y with t h e i r counterparts on the Coast. I r earh case, excessive wage demands convinced manager;-.-1 ther job evaluation could be an e f f e c t i v e t o o l io one restore t i o n of i n d u s t r i a l peace. I t appears l i k e l y that job evaluation v i J l l not be acceptable to management on the B.C. Coast u n t i l the demand for higher wages i s deemed so excessive that management w i l l be forced to accept i t s implementation. The argument that i n t e r n a l p o l i t i c s and factionalism w i l l always prevent the I.W.A. from endorsing job evaluation i s facetious and unfounded. The two schemes in existence at present are proving so worthwhile that public admission of opposition to implementation of job evaluation i n B.C. Coast sawmills would prove p o l i t i c a l l y catastrophic for I.W.A. o f f i c i a l s . In conclusion, job evaluation represents the only v i a b l e technique u t i l i z e d thus far to improve labour- management r e l a t i o n s i n the fo r e s t industry in B r i t i s h Columbia. A r b i t r a t i o n , voluntary or not, does not produce a conducive climate for responsible bargaining. By v i r t u e of an extensive self-government practised i n Sweden, c o l l e c t i v e bargaining has been s i n g u l a r l y free from a r b i t r a t i o n . Since job evaluation has proved to be a worthwhile technique to ensure that self-government works in Sweden's forest industry, i t i s highly recommended as a possible means to resolve some of the cantatr.=r~s problems i n the B.C. forest industry. BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Dunn, ... ,D. and Rachel, F.M. Wage and Salary Administration, i e v York, McGraw-Hill, 1971. International Labour O f f i c e . Job Evaluation. Geneva,La Tribune de Geneve, 1960. Jamieson, S. I n d u s t r i a l Relations i n Canada. Toronto, Macmillan, 1957. Lipton, C. The Trade Union Movement of Canada 1827-1959, Montreal, Canadian Social Publications, 1966. Logan, H.A. Trade Unions in Canada. Toronto, Macmillan, 1948. L y t l e , C.W. Job Evaluation Methods. (2nd ed.), New York, Ronald Press, 1954. M i l l e r , R.U. and Isbester, F. Canadian Labour in T r a n s i t i o n . Scarborough, Ontario, Prentice-Hall of Canada, 1971. Otis, J.L. and Leukart, R.H. Job Evaluation: A Basis For Sound Wage Administration. (2nd ed.), New York, Prentice-Hall, 1954. Paterson, T.T. Job Evaluation; A New Method. (vol. 1), London, Business Books, 1972. Reynolds, L.G. Labor Economics and Labor Relations. (2nd ed.), Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey, Prentice- H a l l , 1964. Thomason, G.F. Personnel Manager's Guide to Job Evaluation. London, I n s t i t u t e of Personnel Management, 1968. Tracey, W.R. Evaluating, Training and Development Systems. New York, American Management Association, 1968. ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS Batson, R.J. ''Employee Evaluation: A Review of Current Methods and a Suggested New Approach." Chicago, Public Administration Service, 1959, 68 pp. Carrwricho, D. "Government Report Reveals Sawmill's Past and Future." B r i t i s h Columbia Lumberman, V o l . 57, ~c, 1, January 1973, pp. 31-32. I n d u s t r i a l Relations Counselors, Inc. Group Wage Incentives: Experience With the ScanIon Plan. New York, 1962, 48 pp. International Association of Machinists (Research Department) What's Wrong With Job Evaluation. Washington, D.C., 1954, 100 pp. Jamieson, S. "Multi-Employer Bargaining: The Case of B.C. Coast Lumber Industry." Relations I n d u s t r i e l l e s . V o l . 26, No. 1, January, 1971, 21 pp. Jurgensen, C.E. "Recent Trends i n Employee Performance Evaluation." Employee Performance Appraisal Re- examined, Chicago, Public Personnel Association, No. 513, 7 pp. K e l l y , P.R. "Reappraisal of Appraisals." Harvard Business Reviev;, V o l . 36, No. 3, May-June 1958, pp. 59-68. McGregor, Douglas. "An Uneasy Look at Performance Appraisal. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 35, No. 3, May-June 1957, pp. 89-94. Mayfield, H. "In Defense of Performance Appraisal." Harvard Business Review, V o l . 38, No. 2, March-April 1960, pp. 81-87. Richards, K.E. "Facts, Fears, and F a l l a c i e s About Performance Appraisal." Employee Performance Appraisal Re-examined, Chicago, Public Personnel Association, No. 613, 9 pp. Sharp, T.L. and White, L.C. "An Approach to Employee Evaluation: The F i e l d Review." Public Personnel Review, V o l . 17, No. 1, January 1956, pp. 13-16. NEWSPAPER ARTICLES "Forest Contract Pressure Cooker. . ." Vancouver Province, 26 February, 1972. "Bargaining for a P o l i t i c a l Saw-off." Vancouver Sun, 7 June, 1972. "Try A r b i t r a t i o n in Forest S t r i k e . " Vancouver Sun, 28 June, 1972. "Leadership of I.W.A. Out of Kil±er." Vancouver Province, 12 July, 1972. "A Warning From 15,000 Absentee I.W.A. Votes?" Vancouver Province, 12 July, 1972. "A Strike That Need Never Have Been." Vancouver Sun, 14 July, 1972. "The Best Case For Binding A r b i t r a t i o n . " Vancouver Sun, 29 July, 1972. "Union to Stand or F a l l . " Vancouver Province, 2 August, 1972. "A Lost Cause." Vancouver Sun, 8 August, 1972. "Working For The Unions." Vancouver Province, 11 October, 1972. UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL (For Public Consumption) Fingarson, L.A. Interim Report on Sawmill Job Evaluation in the I n t e r i o r Locals of B.C. August, 1970. Fingarson, L.A. and Houston, J . Report on F i n a l Gradings in the B.C. Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Evaluation Program. December, 1971. Fingarson, L.A. Submission on Plywood Job Evaf. .aoicr. 3efore The Honourable Mr. Justice Nathan Nemet- .Ir. Be ha If Of The International Woodworkers of America. Vancc_~er, B.C., July, 1970. 166 Houston, J . Sawmill Job Evaluation Seminar, May . 13,2. Industry Proposal for Coast Sawmill Evaluation Manual. February 3, 1972. Job Evaluation Manual I n t e r i o r Sawmill Industry. December, 1971. Job Evaluation Manual Plywood Industry of B.C. September, 1955 (Amended July, 1966; August, 1971). Job Evaluation Manual Sawmill and Logginq Industry of B.C. Coast. February, 1966. Job Evaluation Manual Sawmill Industry of the B.C. Coast. A p r i l , 1969. Luckhurst, L.J. The I.W.A.-F.I.R. 1972 Settlement. November, 1972, 25 pp. Nemetz, The Honourable Mr. Justice Nathan T. Re_: Dispute Between The I.W.A. and F.I.R. Law Courts, Vancouver 1, B.C., August 17, 1970. Paul, F. Rebuttal by F.I.R. to the Submission by the I .W.A. Regional Counc i 1 No. 1_ on the Subject of Plywood Job Evaluation. Vancouver, B.C., July, 1970. Paul, F. Seminar on Plywood Evaluation. V i l l a Motor Inn, Burnaby, B.C., A p r i l 29, 1970. Southern-Northern I n t e r i o r Sawmill Job Evaluation "Administra- t i o n " . August 29, 1970. VanderHeide, T. and Paul, F. Implementation of Professor Wilkinson's Report in the B.C. Northern I n t e r i o r . November 26, 1971. Wilkinson, H.C. Plywood Job Evaluation Report. Vancouver, B.C., August 1, 1971. PER SONAL COMMUNICATION Bennett, Keith (Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations) . Interview with the w r i t e r . 6 December, 1972. Close, Marc ( B r i t i s h Columbia Forest Produces). Interview with the w r i t e r . 8 February, 1973. Gish, Norman ( B r i t i s h Columbia Forest Products). l e t t e r to the w r i t e r . 24 January, 1973. Fl a t e r , George ( B r i t i s h Columbia Forest Products). Letter to the wr i t e r . 8 March, 1973. Fingarson, Lome ( P a c i f i c Northwest Consultants). Inter- views with the wr i t e r . 18 November, 1972; 19 February, 1973; 1 March, 1973. Houston, John (Interior Forest Labour Relations Association) Interviews with the w r i t e r . 22 February, 1973; 23 February, 1973. McKee, C l i v e (Independent Labour Mediator) . Interview v/ith the w r i t e r . 1 March, 1973. Paul, Frank (Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations). Interview with the w r i t e r . 6 December, 1972. Scott, Ralph (International Woodworkers of America). Let t e r to the writ e r . 5 March, 1973. Trineer, Wyman (International Woodworkers of America). Interview with the wr i t e r . 22 February, 1973. VanderHeide, Tony (International Woodworkers of America). Interviews with the writ e r . 2 March, 1973; 9 March, 1973. Walls, Maurice (International Woodworkers of America). Interviews with the w r i t e r . 2 March, 1973; 5 March, 1973; 9 March, 1973. OTHER SOURCES Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s . 72-201. I.W.A. and F.I.R. Master Agreement 1972-1973. June 15, 1972. National Broadcasting Corporation ( t e l e v i s i o n ) . " J : : Enrichment." F i r s t Tuesday, 10:00 p.m., March 7. 1973. Smith, James A. "The Structure of Wages in the P a c i f i c Northwest Lumber Industry, 1939-1954." Spokane, Washington, Washington State University, unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Economics, 1967, 394 p t . S t a t i s t i c s Canada. 25-202, 1970. 1 6 8 0. 3•2 CHANGES IH THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE RECOMMENDATION NO. 1 - A r t i c l e h o f Supple m e n t No. 2 s h o u l d be c h a n - ged t o r e a d as f o l l o w s : k. PLANT JOB REVIEW COMMITTEE a. T h e r e s h a l l be a c o m m i t t e e c o n s t i t u t e d i n each p l y w o o d p l a n t named t h e P l a n t Job R e v i e w Committee ( h e r e i n r e f e r r e d t o as Re v i e w Committee) t o c o n s i s t o f two members r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f Management and two members r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e e m p l o y e e s . A t l e a s t one r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f Management must be a member o f t h e P l a n t ' s s a l a r i e d s t a f f o r Management, a n d a t l e a s t one r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e employees must be an emp l o y e e o f t h e P l a n t whose j o b i s s u b j e c t t o P l y w o o d Job E v a l u a t i o n . Manage- ment may c h o o s e t h e i r s e c o n d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e f r o m amongst p e r - s ons not e m p l o y e d a t t h e p l a n t , a n d t h e U n i o n may do l i k e w i s e e x c e p t t h a t n e i t h e r p a r t y may c h o o s e as i t s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e a member o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee o r any p e r s o n who i s e m p l o y e d as a j o b e v a l u a t o r by F o r e s t I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s L t d . o r be R e g i o n a l C o u n c i l No. 1 o f .the I . W. A. b. The. Company s h a l l r e i m b u r s e any o f i t s h o u r l y - p a i d employees f o r t i m e l o s t w h i l e a c t i n g as a member o f z~= Rev i ew Commi- t e e .or w h i l e p r e s e n t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , - -'s own j o b , b e f o r e a r e g u l a r l y c o n v e n e d m e e t i n g ; r ; r e :'. :. r o m m i t t e e . The Company s h a l l n o t be res pons i b 5 i fr. r rem-j-e r = :' " g em- p l o y e e rep res en to t ! ves who a r e no: i ;s h o u r l y - p a i r employe-:::. 1 6 9 11. RECOMMENDATION NO. 2 - A r t i c l e 5 o f Supplement i\c. 2 :' be c h a n g e d t o r e a d as f o 1 lows : 5. FUNCTION OF REVIEW COMMITTEE a . The R e v i e w Committee w i l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s e e i n g t h a t a l l r e q u e s t s f o r e v a l u a t i o n o r r e - e v a l u a t i o n o f j o b s a r e a d e q u a t e l y and a c c u r a t e l y documented b e f o r e b e i n g p a s s e d t o t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee f o r f u r t h e r a c t i o n . The documents r e - q u i r e d w i l l i n c l u d e a "Request f o r J o b E v a l u a t i o n " f o r m s u b - m i t t e d e i t h e r by an i n d i v i d u a l e mployee o r by l o c a l Manage- ment, a n d a f u l l y c o m p l e t e d J o b D e s c r i p t i o n w h i c h p r o v i d e s s u f f i c i e n t i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e s u b s e q u e n t work o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n C o m m i t t e e . The f o r m o f t h e d o c u m e n t s , t h e p r o c e d - u r e s f o r s u b m i t t i n g and h a n d l i n g them, a n d t h e t i m e l i m i t s f o r c o m p l e t i o n may be amended os r e q u i r e d by t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee u n d e r t h e a u t h o r i t y . g i v e n them by A r t i - c l e 3 o f t h i s s u p p l e m e n t . b. D e c i s i o n s o f t h e R e v i e w Committee r e s p e c t i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e - n e s s o f a r e q u e s t f o r e v a l u a t i o n o r r e - e v a l u a t i o n , o r r e s p e c - t i n g t h e a d e q u a c y and a c c u r a c y o f d o c u m e n t s , s h a l l be by unanimous a g r e e m e n t . F a i l i n g s u c h agreement w i t h i n t h e e s - t a b l i s h e d t i m e l i m i t , t h e R e v i e w Committee s h a l l , a t t h e r e - q u e s t o f any one o f i t s members, immediate 1-- ' o r w a r d t h e R e q u e s t f o r Job E v a l u a t i o n , t o g e t h e r w i t ' - =ry : r o r documents on w h i c h t h e r e i s unanimous agreement.. ~z- t h e ? 1 y.;;od E v a l u a - t i o n Committee and s h a l l t h e n hove r : f u r t h e r r e s p e r ; i b i 1 i t y f o r d o c u m e n t i n g t h a t r e q u e s t . c. V/hcn t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Conmi t l c o has made a dec:; o- r e s p e c t i rig t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f a j o b , i t s h a l l conr.vjn i co : the-1 12. d e c i s i o n t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e R e v i e w Conitii tto . . e . T h e ? . » v i ew Committee w i l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i n f o r m i n g : o n a g c m e n . t and t h e employees c o n c e r n e d , g i v i n g r e a s o n s f o r t h e outcome v/here t h e s e a r e a v a i l a b l e . A d e c i s i o n o f t h e R e v i e w Commi- te e t h a t an A p p l i c a t i o n f o r Job Eva 1 u a t i o n s h o u 1 d not be f o r w a r d e d t o t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee w i l l , s i m i l - a r l y , be c o m m u n i c a t e d w i t h r e a s o n s t o t h o s e c o n c e r n e d , d. N o t h i n g i n t h i s a r t i c l e l i m i t s t h e r i g h t o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee t o d e t e r m i n e t h e f a c t s a b o u t a n y j o b , by d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n o r o t h e r w i s e , o r t o amend any j o b d e s c r i p t i o n o r s p e c i f i c a t i o n s u b m i t t e d t o them i n s u p p o r t o f a R e q u e s t F o r Job E v a l u a t i o n f o r m . RECOMMENDATION NO. 3 - A r t i c l e 12 o f Supplement No. 2 s h o u l d be c h a n - ged t o r e a d as f o l l o w s : 12. REFERRAL PROCEDURE a. V/hen t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee has d e c i d e d t h e o u t - come o f a R e q u e s t F o r Job E v a l u a t i o n , i t s h a l l t r a n s m i t i t s d e c i s i o n t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e P l a n t Job R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e . b. V/hen an employee's r e q u e s t f o r r e - e v a l u a t i o n r e s u l t s i n no c h a n g e b e i n g m a d e i n the. j o b g r a d e , or i n a r e d u c t i o n , o r when a Management r e q u e s t r e s u l t s i n no change o r i n an i n - c r e a s e , t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee g i v e t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e R e v i e w Committee a s h o r t s : H: ~ " •= r - : " t h e r e a - sons f o r t h e d e c i s i o n . The s t a t e n e r , : :-' ? J i c r . c . i n t o g r e a t d e t a i l , b u t s h o u l d i n d i c a t e i ~ o c r i t e r i a i n s u f f i c i e n t d e p t h t o s h o w t h e a p p l : c?..-:t t h a t t h e r o c . r s t v.o; g i v e n a d e q u a t e a t t e n t i o n . 171 13. c . An e v a l u a t i o n done by the Plywood Eva or, C;-.". i t tee s h a l l b e f i n a l and b ind ing on the p a r t i e s b u t , zz a-_ z'--z a f t e r f i v e years s i n c e the l a s t e v a l u a t i o n or r e - . z 1 ua t i z..- of a j o b , Management or an i n d i v i d u a l employee may submit a re - quest fo r r e - e v a l u a t i o n of that job and no o ther reason than the e lapsed time s h a l l be n e c e s s a r y . d . If the Plywood E v a l u a t i o n Committee is unable to reach a g r e e - ment regard ing the d i s p o s i t i o n o f a Request f o r Job E v a l u a - t i o n or any other matter regard ing the job e v a l u a t i o n p r o - gramme which f a l l s w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n , the matter s h a l l b e r e f e r r e d to Fores t I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s L imi ted and to the I.V/.A. Regional Counc i l f o r s e t t l e m e n t . e. A l l communication between any P l a n t Review Committee and the Plywood E v a l u a t i o n Committee r e f e r r e d to above s h a l l be e f f e - c t e d by sending one copy to the Union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e or re - p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the committee and one copy to the Employer r e p r e s e n t a t i v e or r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . In the case o f communica- t i o n s to a P l a n t Review Committee, the Union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s wi. l l be addressed c a r e of the o f f i c e of the a p p r o p r i a t e Union Local and the Employer r e p r e s e n t a t i v e care of the Company's o f f i c e s at the p l a n t . In the case of communications to the Plywood E v a l u a t i o n Committee, the Union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e \-/i 1 1 be adressed care of the o f f i c e s of R e g i c r ; " I r - ' n c i l I.'o. 1 of the I.V/.A. Vancouver and the Employer - e r r es cr. z~z ' ve care of the o f f i c e s of Forest I n d u s t r i a l Re '= : !ons L t d . REC.C'M.".E?.'DATIp:.' ..'0 . - t : - Requests f o r re-eve iua i i on submit ted 5 1 01 y on the ground; of "e lapsed t ime" under the r e v i s e d S e c t i c ~ r . A r t i c l e 12 o f Supp l e m e n t No. 2 t o t h e M a s t e r Ar-moment s h o u l d n o t be a c c e p t e d by t h e P l a n t R e v i e w Committees c r by t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee b e f o r e J a n u a r y 1 s t , 1972. The p u r p o s e o f t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n i s t o r e d u c e t h e w o r k - l o a d o f R e v i e w Conmi- t e e s a n d t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee a t a t i m e when, due t o o t h e r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n t h i s r e p o r t , many o t h e r a d j u s t m e n t s wi11 have t o be a c c o m p l i s h e d . CHANGES IN FORMS AND PROCEDURES In my recommended w o r d i n g f o r A r t i c l e 5 o f Supp l e m e n t 2 i t i s s t a t e d t h a t " t h e f o r m o f t h e d o c u m e n t s , t h e p r o c e d u r e s f o r s u b m i t t i n g a n d h a n d l i n g them, and t h e t i m e l i m i t s f o r c o m p l e t i o n , a r e t o be amen- ded as r e q u i r e d by t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee u n d e r t h e a u t h o r i t y g i v e n them by A r t i c l e 3 o f t h i s s u p p l e m e n t . " B e c a u s e o f t h e c o n s t i t - u t i o n o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n Committee t h e r e has i n t h e p a s t been some d i f f i c u l t y i n coming t o ag r e e m e n t on amendments o f t h i s k i n d . V / h i l e I b e l i e v e s t r o n g l y t h a t t h e Committee must e v e n t u a l l y g e t t o t h e p o i n t ' o f b e i n g a b l e t o make s u c h d e c i s i o n s , I am a f r a i d t h a t i t may be some t i m e b e f o r e t h e y do s o . In t h e meantime t h e r e a r e a number o f r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l b u t n e c e s s a r y changes w h i c h I h a v e d e c i d e d s h o u l d be made now; t h e s e a r e as f o l l o w s : RECOMMENDATION NO. 5: - The J o b D e s c r i p t i o n F o r - sh - E x h i b i t 1 s h o u l d r e p l a c e t h e p r e s e n t f r e e - f o r m ne r : ' s t y ' i e r. " d e s c r i p - t i o n . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s new form i s : c p r o v i d e -ore- :u i dance t o t h o s e who w r i t e up t h e j o b d e s c r i p t o r , b e c a u s e f r o " .- on t h e y w i l l be merr b e r s o f v a r i o u s P l a n t r.rtvi ew Corr:r;i ttcc-s " r s : ; : i 15. t i o n Comrni t t c c . RECOMMENDATION NO. 6: - The " R e q u e s t f o r Job E v a l u a t i o n " f o r m s h o u l d b e amended t o c o n f o r m t o E x h i b i t 2. The chang e s i n t h i s f o r m v.'hile v e r y m i n o r i n n a t u r e , do e m p h a s i z e t h e new r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e P l a n t R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e s . RECOMMENDATION NO. 7: - The r e v i s e d w o r d i n g o f S e c t i o n b , A r t i c l e 5, of S u p p l e m e n t No. 2 r e f e r s t o a t i m e l i m i t f o r a g r e e m e n t b y t h e P l a n t R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e . I t i s w i t h i n the. a u t h o r i t y o f t h e P l y - wood E v a l u a t i o n Committee t o e s t a b l i s h a n d amend t h i s t i m e l i m i t as t h e y s e e f i t , b u t i n o r d e r t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e new p r o c e d u r e i s n ot h a z a r d e d by any i n d e c i s i o n on t h i s q u e s t i o n , I recommend t h a t t h e t i m e l i m i t be e s t a b l i s h e d i n i t i a l l y a t f i v e w e e k s . EXH IB IT I: FORM OF JOB DESCRIPTION B. C. PL WOOD INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION P l a n t : Prepared by: Department: Revised by: Job T i t l e : Revised by: ( s h i f t s - incumbents each s h i f t ) JOB DESCRIPTION 1) PURPOSE OF THE JOB (and l o c a t i o n ) 2 ) /-AKE AND MODEL OF ANY EQUIPMENT OF S IGN IF ICANCE (which i s operat e d by incumbent)" 3) STEP BY STEP A C T I V I T I E S OF MAIN JOB (from r e c e i v i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s t o c o m p l e t i o n o f f i n a l step) AND PRODUCT (s) HANDLED • 1 7 5 17. EXHIBIT 1: ( c o n t i n u e d from Page' 16) P l a n t : Prepa red b y : Dept . : Rev i sed b y : Job T i t l e : R e v i s e d by : ( s h i f t s - incumbents each s h i f t ) '0 SECONDARY DUTIES ( s e t t i n g , a d j u s t i n q , s e r v i c i n g o f equipment) 5) RESPONSIBILITY FOR DIRECTING OTHERS ( a s s i g n i n g v;ork, c h e c k i n g r e s u l t s - l i s t number o f peop le s u p e r v i s e d ) REGULAR OR OCCASIONAL RELIEF DUTIES ( l i s t e x t e n t , and r a t e o f pay) 7) . REGULAR OR OCCASIONAL REPORTS, T A L L I E S , RECORDS ( l i s t t i t l e s . and h e a d i n g s , purpose and d i s p o s a l - a t t a c h sample) C \ RELATED DUTIES ( e . g . c l eanup o f equipment o r work £ - = 3 : ; - o d d j o b s ) j 1 i i — i E X H I B I T 2 : F O R M O F R E Q U E S T FOR E V A L U A T I O N B.' C . C O A S T F O R E S T I N D U S T R Y R E Q U E S T FOR J C B E V A L U A T I O N R E V I E W C O M M I T T E E P L Y W O O D J O B E V A L U A T I O N N a m e o f C o m p a n y N a m e o f A p p l i c a n t D a t e S u b m i t t e d P r e s e n t J o b C a t e g o r y D e p a r t m e n t P r e s e n t J o b G r a d e S h i f t s P r e s e n t J o b R a t e N o . o f E m p l o y e e s p e r s h i f t R e a s o n s f o r R e q u e s t ( S t a t e S p e c i f i c J o b C h a n g e ( s ) a n d a t t a c h a m e n d e d o r n e w j o b d e s c r i p t i o n ) : ( S i g n a t u r e o f A p p l i c a n t ) REviEW COMMITTEE ONLY r_ = te Request A c t e d On D i s p o s i t i o n and Reasons : "0" n i l i a of Review Cor-- :-o; Th is f o r n must be du ly corp1 • c r i pt i on , to ensure coes ; t e c : must be r a t i on by the P . :cco-"-pan i e d by . C. J. ( ( 19 3.3 THE INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION COMMITTEE . S u p p l e m e n t No. 2 d e s c r i b e s how t h e I n d u s t r y J o b E v a l u a t i o n C o . - - i t t e e i s c o n s t i t u t e d and d e f i n e s i t s d u t i e s . T h e r e seem t o be a number o f p r o b l e m s w h i c h f l o w f r o m t h e r a t h e r vague w o r d i n g o f Supp l e m e n t No. 2 as w e l l as f r o m t h e r a t h e r p o w e r l e s s n a t u r e o f t h e c o m m i t t e e i t s e l f . I d e s c r i b e t h e s e b e l o w b u t am n o t p r e p a r e d t o make r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o r r u l i n g s t o overcome them b e c a u s e o f my c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e p a r t i e s must f i r s t a g r e e on a new c o n s t i t u t i o n f o r t h e p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a - t i v e b o d y b e f o r e i t c a n be e f f e c t i v e . The p r o b l e m s a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) The c o m m i t t e e members have a b s o l u t e l y no t e n u r e i n o f f i c e b u t depend on t h e p l e a s u r e o f t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l s f r o m day t o day. (2) A l t h o u g h i t has been t h e p r a c t i c e o f t h e p a r t i e s t o a p p o i n t t h e i r e v a l u a t o r s t o t h e c o m m i t t e e t h e r e i s n o t h i n g w h i c h o f f i c i a l l y r e - l a t e s membership t o work i n j o b e v a l u a t i o n o r t o t h e p o s s e s s i o n o f a n y k i n d o f s k i l l o r competence i n t h e a r e a . (3) I u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h e r e have been a number o f o c c a s i o n s when t h e membership o f t h e c o m m i t t e e has been i n d o u b t , p a r t i c u l a r l y when two teams o f e v a l u a t o r s h ave been e m p l o y e d . In s u c h c a s e s each team a p p e a r s t o have been c o n s i d e r e d as a s e p a r a t e I n d u s t r y J o b E v a l u a t i o n C o m m i t t e e , whereas q u i t e c l e a r l y t h ' i "~ n o t i n t e n d e d by S u p p l e m e n t No . 2. A l t h o u g h t h i s c o m m i t t e e i s c h a r g e d by Sup- " £ - = — N o . 2 - i t h a d - m i n i s t e r i n g t h e P r o g r a m m e , i t seems t h a t p r i n c i p a l s > ew t h e c o m m i t t e e s o l e l y as e v a l u a t o r s a n d the ', ti ee t h e - s e • \ : :- da n o t f e e l t h a t t h e y have t h e a u t h o r i t y ; o c h a r g e a dm i n i s t r -: : ' •, •; • p r o c e d u r e s , even t h o u g h s u c h a u t h o r i t y i s c l e a r l y g i v e n i - : . . : z • 0 20. ment No. 2. (5) L i t t l e i f any t h o u g h t seems t o have e v e r been c ' . . e n t o c o n t r o l o f a c t i v i t i e s o r r e s u l t s . Q u e s t i o n s s u c h as t h e f o l l o w i n g do n o t have any s i n g l e f o c u s a t p r e s e n t . What i s a r e a s o n a b l e work-, l o a d f o r an e v a l u a t o r ? How c o n s i s t e n t a r e r a t i n g s o v e r t i m e and between p l a n t s ? V/hat i s t h e b a c k l o g o f work a n d t h e e x t e n t o f d e l a y ? V/hat do e m p l o y e r s and employees t h i n k o f t h e p l a n ? V/hat a r e t h e c o s t s and b e n e f i t s ? (6) The method o f s e t t l i n g d i s a g r e e m e n t s between t h e two members o f t h e c o m m i t t e e on q u e s t i o n s o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r e v a l u a t i o n i s by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p a r t i e s . W h i l e t h i s a p p e a r s t o have been a s a t i s f a c t o r y a r r a n g e m e n t i t seams t h a t m o s t , i f not a l l , o f t h e q u e s t i o n s s o r e f e r r e d have c o n c e r n e d e v a l u a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n ad- m i n i s t r a t i v e m a t t e r s . Even on q u e s t i o n s o f e v a l u a t i o n , t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e means o f s e t t l e m e n t , a l m o s t i n e v i t a b l y compro- m i s e , has c r e a t e d a n o m o l i e s i n t h e wage s t r u c t u r e f r o m t i m e t o t ime. (7) A t t h e p r e s e n t moment t h e l a c k o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i v n e s s i s n o t t o o s e r i o u s b e c a u s e r e l a t i v e l y few p e o p l e a r e i n v o l v e d i n t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o c e d u r e s and t h e y know and r e s p e c t each o t h e r . V/ith more work b e i n g done by t h e P l a n t pNeview C o m m i t t e e s , however, many more p e o p l e ' w i l l be i n v o l v e d and one must e x p e c t a d m i n i s t r a - t i v e d e c i s i o n s a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l t o b e r r - e n o t o n l y v e r y much more i m p o r t a n t , b u t v e r y much more d i f r ' * 7. = : w e l l . T h e r e a r e a number o f p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s t o th : 5 r . i r-~ . r o r exa.-.p 1 e , one c o u l d p r o v i d e f o r t h i r d - p a r t y s e t t l e m e n t c " a : s a g r e e m e - : : on an i n t e r m i t t c r . t o r on a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s ; o r c " :- c o u l d es tab \ 0 p e r - m a n e n t , n e u t r a l c h a i r m a n v/ho wou 1 c! meet f r e : • ;-r, t ! y wi t h t h e c ' . ' e r - 21. bers of the committee and be a v a i l a b l e when cz'-'z'.s s p l i t ; or one c o u l d e s t a b l i s h a s e p a r a t e l y incorpora ted b o d ' - ic-:. dc.-1 o f e i t h e r p a r t y but f inanced by them, a c c o r d i n g to some cost s h a r i n g f o r - mula . It is c l e a r however that a l l these s o l u t i o n s trespass on im- por tant and wel l e s t a b l i s h e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the employers and the union and cannot r e a l l y be worked out by a t h i r d p a r t y , p a r t i c u1 a r - l y one who has not been g iven s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n s to do so . Because the q u a l i t y of i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n w i l l a f f e c t the long-run e f f e c t i v e - ness and acceptance of the programme, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f Job E v a l u a t i o n is a p p l i e d to other segments of the i n d u s t r y as w e l l , the f o l l o w i n g recommendation is o f f e r e d . RECOMMENDATION NO. 8: - The p a r t i e s shou ld undertake s e r ious d i s - cus s ions with a view to making changes in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o r - g a n i z a t i o n of the Plan so that there may be a c o n t i n u a l and com- petent d i r e c t i o n and c o n t r o l of t h i s i n c r e a s i n g l y important a c t i v i t y . l O U 22. S E C T I O N k: THE T E C H N I C A L STRUCTURE OF THE JOB EVALUATION --V; U.} INTRODUCTION The t e c h n i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e P l a n i s d e f i n e d i n a b o o k l e t en- t i t l e d "Job E v a l u a t i o n Manual f o r O p e r a t i o n a l H o u r l y - p a i d j o b s i n t h e P l y w o o d I n d u s t r y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . " The t e c h n i c a l s t r u c t u r e com- p r i s e s e l e v e n j o b c r i t e r i a , each w i t h a number o f d e f i n e d d e g r e e s . E a c h d e g r e e c a r r i e s an a s s i g n e d p o i n t v a l u e and h a l f d e g r e e s have been r e c o g n i z e d f o r a l l c r i t e r i a a l t h o u g h t h e y a r e n o t d e f i n e d . In w o r k i n g o u t changes i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e P l a n , I have a t t - e mpted t o m i n i m i z e ' t h e n e t e f f e c t on c o s t s o r a v e r a g e wages i n t h e i n d u s t r y . I must e m p h a t i c a l l y s t a t e t h a t my mandate has been t o i n - v e s t i g a t e t h e way i n w h i c h t h e P l a n e s t a b l i s h e s t h e r e l a t i v e v a l u e o f j o b s i n t h e i n d u s t r y , n o t t o f i n d a way o f g a i n i n g e i t h e r a g e n e r a l wage i n c r e a s e f o r e m p l o y e e s , o r a r e d u c t i o n i n l a b o u r c o s t s f o r em- p l o y e r s . N a t u r a l l y , g i v e n t h e " r e d c i r c l e " p r i n c i p l e , a n y r e a d j u s t - ment o f t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n o f j o b s i n t h e wage s c a l e w i l l r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d c o s t f o r t h e e m p l o y e r s , a t l e a s t i n t h e s h o r t r u n , even i f t h e a v e r a g e o f a l l p o i n t v a l u e s f o r j o b s s h o u l d r e m a i n t h e same. A l s o i t i s e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t , i f not i m p o s s i b l e , t o d e v i s e changes i n t h e c r i t e r i a w h i c h , when a p p l i e d , do not r e s u l t i n some change i n t h e a v e r a g e p o i n t v a l u e o f a l l j o b s even though s u c h a change i s n o t w a r r a n t e d o r i n t e n d e d . I t i s t r u e , t o o , t h a t one zz~zz t o a v o i d ex- t e n s i v e " r e d c i r c l i n g " b e c a u s e i t r e s u l t s no t c - " . - '. r. zz'z~z] d i s s a - t i s f a c t i o n among t h e w o r k f o r c e , b u t a l s o i n ; ~ c a e s e d a z~.' ~ ' s t r a t i ve d i f f i c u l t y f o r t h e e m p l o y e r s . T h e s e r c s e r v r ; ' c ' = w o u l d r.zz z :• so im- p o r t a n t w e r e .we i n a p e r i o d o f r a p i d economi c g r o w t h when £ 1 :•; -a t i c : i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p s wou 1 c! t e n d t o be o b s c u r e d by a p a t t e r n c"' - r ' - 181 23. v e r s a ! wage and c o s t i n c r e a s e . As i t i s h o wever. ;-ey - ••.. e c r e s t e d p r e s s u r e s and c o u n t e r p r e s s u r e s v:hich have made th e r e r -. r " r - r p o s - i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n s an e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t one. In d e v e l o p i n g t h e changes p r o p o s e d i n recommendations 9 t h r o u g h 13> 1 have t r i e d t o f o l l o w two p r i n c i p l e s : F i r s t , b e c a u s e t h e v a l u e s o f e m p l o y e r s and employees change w i t h i n n o v a t i o n and t h e p a s s a g e o f t i m e , a j o b e v a l u a t i o n s y s t e m , w h i c h has t o r e f l e c t p e r s o n a l v a l u e s r e l a t i n g t o w o r k , must p e r i o d i c a l l y be a d j u s t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . S e c o n d , c h a n g e s made a t any one p o i n t i n t i m e must n o t be s o e x t e n s i v e as t o u p s e t c o m p l e t e l y t h e e x i s t i n g wage r e l a t i o n s h i p s and t h u s c r e a t e more p r o b l e m s t h a n t h e y c a n p o s s i b l y c u r e . h.2 CHANGES IN THE JOB EVALUATION MANUAL RECOMMENDATION NO. 9: - F a c t o r 1, E d u c a t i o n , d e s c r i b e d on pages 5 and 6 o f t h e Manual s h o u l d be r e d u c e d f r o m s i x t o f o u r d e g r e e s and f r o m a maximum o f 50 p o i n t s t o a maximum o f 25. The Manual s h o u l d be amended as f o l l o w s : - - - D e g r e e h on page 5 s h o u l d be changed t o r e a d : h. R e q u i r e s knowledge o r a s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l w h i c h w o u l d n o r - m a l l y be a c q u i r e d o n l y by f u l l - t i m e t r a i n i n g o u t s i d e t h e v/ork e n v i r o n m e n t f o r a p e r i o d o f s e v e n n o n t h s o r more. Degrees 5 and 6 on page 6 s h o u l d be e 1 i rr,'~e : e r . The p o i n t v a l u e s shown on page 18 o p p e s ' c e Ore f i r r o r , " Educa- t i o n " , s h o u l d be amended s o t h a t dec r e : - 1, 2, 3 £ ~ r h are a s s i g n e d 0, 8, 16 and 25 p o i n t s res : iz : i ve 1 y w i t h t i --i h a l f - d e g r e e s i n t e r p o l a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . C i e r e e s and above w i l l a 11 show z e r o p o i n t s . 182 2h. RECOMMENDATION' NO. IO: - F a c t o r 2, E x p e r i e n c e , c i e s c ' - . s i cr. p a c e 7 o f t h e Manual s h o u l d be r e d u c e d f r o m n i n e t o s i x d e g r e e s and t h e maximum v a l u e s h o u l d be r e d u c e d f r o m 90 t o 50 p o i n t s . The Man- u a l s h o u l d be amended as f o l l o w s : D e g r e e 6 on page 7 s h o u l d be c h a n g e d t o r e a d : 6. More t h a n t h r e e y e a r s - - - D e g r e e s 7, 8 and 9 on page 7 s h o u l d b e e l i m i n a t e d The p o i n t v a l u e s shown on page 18 o p p o s i t e t h e f a c t o r , ' E xper- i e n c e ' , s h o u l d be amended t o show z e r o p o i n t s f o r a l l d e g r e e s a b o v e 6. RECOMMENDATION NO. 11: - The t i t l e o f F a c t o r 3 s h o u l d be c h a n g e d f r o m " C o m p l e x i t y o f D u t i e s " t o "Judgment and I n i t i a t i v e " i n o r d e r t o more a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t t h e o r i g i n a l i n t e n t o f t h i s c r i t e r i o n a nd t h u s t o h e l p e v a l u a t o r s t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h i s f a c t o r f r o m . " M e n t a l a n d V i s u a l Demand." The Manual s h o u l d be c h a n g e d as f o l l o w s : On page 8 change t h e t i t l e f r o m " C o m p l e x i t y o f D u t i e s " t o "Judgment and I n i t i a t i v e . " On page 18 make t h e same change i n the l e f t - h a n d c o l u m n , f a c - t o r no. 3- RECOMMENDATION NO. 12: - F a c t o r 6, M e n t a l and V i s u a l Demand s h o u l d be i n c r e a s e d f r o m f i v e t o s i x d e g r e e s a n d i t s r e v a l u e f rom 35 t o 70 p o i n t s . The Manual s h o u l d be amer . rer ==• s : On page 12 r e p l a c e t h e p r e s e n t d e f i s o f c : r - - . 3 s a n d 5 wi t h t h e f o 1 1 o w i n g : k. C l o s e m e n t a l e n d v i s u a l a t t e n t i c .-here- dec i s i c r - v r i r e is c o n t i nuous arm! t h e m a t e r i a l h e i r - ; w o r k e d on i s vo r '. i • 1 o , 25. where the o p e r a t i o n o f t h e e q u i p m e n t o r : r : ' s ; s = '. r.p1 o a: , f o r e x a m p l e , when t h e r e a r e one o r two or,-z~~ zz~z~z ' s c-ri 1 y . 5. C o n c e n t r a t e d m e n t a l a n d / o r v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n t o a c o n t i n u o u s o p e r a t i o n w h e r e i n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e m a t e r i a l a r e v a r i a b l e , and where t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e e q u i p m e n t o r t o o l s i s m o d e r a t e l y c o m p l e x a s , f o r e x a m p l e , when b o t h o n - o f f a n d v a r i a b l e c o n t r o l s must be o p e r a t e d o r when s i m u l t a n e o u s a t t - e n t i o n t o s e v e r a l phases o f t h e o p e r a t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l . On page 12 add a new d e g r e e , number 6 , d e f i n e d as f o l l o w s : D e g r e e 6: C o n c e n t r a t e d m e n t a l a n d / o r v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n t o a c o n - t i n u o u s o p e r a t i o n w h e r e i n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e m a t e r i a l a r e v a r i a b l e and t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e e q u i p - ment o r t o o l s i s v e r y c o m p l e x a s , f o r e x a m p l e , when t h e r e a r e a l a r g e number o f c o n t r o l s , many o f a v a r i a - b l e n a t u r e , and where t h e s p e e d and p r e c i s i o n o f t h e i r o p e r a t i o n i s c r i t i c a l t o t h e q u a l i t y o r q u a n t i t y o f p r o d u c t i o n . On page 18 amend t h e p o i n t v a l u e s f o r F a c t o r 6 s o t h a t d e g r e e s h, 5 a n d 6 a r e a s s i g n e d 32 , kS and 70 p o i n t s r e s p e c t i v e l y w i t h . t h e h a l f - d e g r e e s i n t e r p o l a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . The d e f i n i t i o n s o f d e g r e e s a r e t o b e - s u p p l e m e n t e d by t h e "bench-mark" j o b s shown i n E x h i b i t 3 , G r a d i r - r G u i d e l i n e s : M e n t a l and V i s u a l Demand. RE COi'-'iME f.!DAT 1 C I ?.'0 . 1 3 : - The p r e s e n t F a c t o r $ . - .espons i b i l i t . f o r M a t e r i a l s , E q u i p m e n t and P r o d u c t s s h o u l r zz r e p l a c e d by a h e - ; F a c t o r 9 , P r e c e s s R e s p o n s i b i l i t y . The new f a c t o r w i l l . h e : s a mo number o f d e g r e e s b u t w i l l have a maximum v a l u e o f ~. 184 •> 26. as compared w i t h 80 f o r t h e f a c t o r i t r e p l a c e s . T n e m a n u a l s h o u l d be amended as f o l l o w s : - - - R e p l a c e page 15 w i t h t h e page shown i n E x h i b i t 4 On page 18 change t h e t i t l e o f F a c t o r 9 i n t h e l e f t hand column to " P r o c e s s R e s p o n s i b i l i t y " On page 18 amend t h e p o i n t v a l u e s f o r F a c t o r 9, d e g r e e s 2, 3. k and 5 t o 20, hO, 6$ and 100 p o i n t s r e s p e c t i v e 1 y w i t h t h e h a l f d e g r e e s i n t e r p o l a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . 28 E X H I B I T *4: THE NEW FACTOR 9; PROCESS R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y (The f o l l o w i n g m a t e r i a l i s t o r e p l a c e t h e p r e s e n t p a g e 15 i n t h : .: Z.i'-S- t i o n M a n u a l ) FACTOR 9 PROCESS R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y T h i s f a c t o r a p p r a i s e s t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h i t i s i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e w o r k e r s h o u l d b e h a v e i n a c o n s i s t e n t l y r e s p o n s i b l e m a n n e r i n o r d e r t o c o n t r o l t h e e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e p r o c e s s , t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f m a t e r i a l s , t h e l i f e a n d e f f e c - t i v e n e s s o f e q u i p m e n t a n d / o r t h e q u a l i t y o f p r o d u c t . T h i s f a c t o r r e c o g n i z e s t h a t a w o r k e r m a y , i n c e r t a i n j o b s , e x e r c i s e c o n t r o l i n s u c h a way as t o o b - t a i n s u p e r i o r r e s u l t s , not j u s t b y a v o i d i n g m i s t a k e s b u t a l s o b y t a k i n g a d - v a n t a g e o f o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o i m p r o v e t h a t p a r t o f t h e p r o c e s s w h i c h i s u n d e r h i s c o n t r o l . A l l w o r k e r s c o v e r e d b y j o b e v a l u a t i o n a r e t o b e c o n s i d e r e d as p l a y i n g a p a r t i n t h e p r o c e s s ; n o t m e r e l y t h o s e who w o r k on t h e m a i n p r o d u c t i o n l i n e . DEGREE 1. T h e w o r k e r i s c o n s t r a i n e d b y t h e e q u i p m e n t , b y s u p e r v i s i o n o r b y t h e d i s c i p l i n e o f t h e w o r k g r o u p t o do no m o r e a n d no l e s s t h a n what i s r e - q u i r e d . (5 p o i n t s ) . . { 3. \ T h e s e d e g r e e s a r e d e f i n e d by " b e n c h - M a r k " j o b s izr, ; r. / 1. ' 5, G r a d i n g G u i d e l i n e s , P r o c e s s R e s p o n s i b i l i t y . 186 31. k.3 I N C O N S I S T E N C I E S IN P A S T G R A D I N G O v e r t h e p a s t 12. y e a r s o f t h e j o b e v a l u a t i o n p r : r r £ m r r e '5 l i f e , t h e r e h a v e b e e n a n u m b e r o f c h a n g e s i n j o b e v a l u a t i o n t e a m s , a s w e l l a s s o m e w h a t m o r e s u b t l e c h a n g e s i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e i n d u s t r y a n d i n t h e v a l u e s y s t e r n s o f a l l c o n c e r n e d . I t i s i n e v i t a b l e t h e r e f o r e t h a t o n e s h o u l d f i n d a n o m o l i e s a n d i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n t f i e r a t i n g s a s s i g n e d t o j o b s o f e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r . F o r e x a m p l e , R a i m a n n O p e r - a t o r s h a v e e s s e n t i a l l y t h e s a m e d u t i e s a n d w o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d j o b r e q u i r e m e n t s i n a l m o s t a l l p l a n t s b u t t h e p o i n t s a s s i g n e d t h i s j o b f o r a n u m b e r o f f a c t o r s i s i n c o n s i s t e n t b e t w e e n p l a n t s a n d s e e m s t o b e r e l a t e d m o r e t o t h e p o i n t i n t i m e v / h e n t h e e v a l u a t i o n w a s d o n e t h a n t o d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e j o b r e q u i r e m e n t s . O t h e r e x a m p l e s a r e G r e e n C h a i n O f f b e a r e r s , D r y e r F e e d e r s a n d D r y e r G r a d e r O f f b e a r e r s . O n e o f t h e d u t i e s o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n C o m m i t t e e s h o u l d b e t o c o m p a r e r a t - i n g s o f s i m i l a r j o b s t o d e t e r m i n e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s a n d t o i n i t i a t e r e - e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s w h e r e n e c e s s a r y . I n a l l c a s e s b u t o n e , I w o u l d l i k e t o l e a v e t h i s q u e s t i o n t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a - t i o n C o m m i t t e e i n t h e k n o w l e d g e t h a t t h e y a r e c o m p e t e n t t o h a n d l e i t o n c e t h e n e w a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e d u r e s e n a b l e t h e m t o s p e n d m o r e t i m e o n t h i s k i n d o f w o r k . T h e o n e e x c e p t i o n i s t h e j o b o f R a i m a n n O p e r a - t o r . I f t h e r a t i n g s o n t h a t j o b a r e n o t s t a n d a r d i z e d n o w , t h e p r o p o s e d c h a n g e s i n c r i t e r i a w i l l c a u s e f u r t h e r £~ r - : ~ e v i s i b l e i n - c o n s i s t e n c i e s r e s u l t i n g i n u n n e c e s s a r y d i f f i c _ r / . A f ; c " c o n s u l t i n g t h e P l y w o o d E v a l u a t i o n C o m m i t t e e , t h e r e f o r e ; r a v e d e v o ! ~ : e d a s p e - c i f i c r c c o m m e n d a t i o n a s f o l l o w s : PJEWMME NDAJ 1 0 : i NO. Jh: - The g r a d i n g o f a l l 'Ra imann O p e r a t o r : 1 d ••> 1 8 7 3 2 . b e s t a n d a r d i z e d i n f o u r f a c t o r s a s i s s h e w n '. - z.- '-" z".z z. S t a n - d a r d R a t i n g s f o r R a i m a n n O p e r a t o r s . T h i s c h a n ; : ' ; " ; zz r. zz r d i z e a l l R a i m a n n O p e r a t o r s a t 102 p o i n t s u n d e r t h e e x i s t i n g p l a n . T h e p r o p o s e d s t a n d a r d s d o n o t a p p l y t o S k o o g O p e r a t o r s . E X H I B I T 6: S T A N D A R D R A T I N G S FOR R A I MANN O P E R A T O R S D e g r e e s J o b F a c t o r P r e s e n t R a n q e P r o p o s e d L e v e l E d u c a t i o n M - 2 2 E x p e r i e n c e 2 - 2* 2 H a z a r d s 2 - 2* 2 V / o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s 2* - 3 2* JOB EVALUATION MANUAL for Operational Hourly Paid Jobs in the Plywood Industry of British Columbia Prepared by Stevenson & Kellogg, Ltd. Consulting Management Engineering 810 Royal Bank Building Vancouver 2, B. C. Prepared September, 1955 Amended July, 1966 Amended August, 1971 - 5 - 1 8 9 TO";! Factor 1 EDUCATION This factor i s a measure of the basic education required for a success- ful performance of the job. It can be described as the intellectual background the employee brings to the job as opposed to what he learns on the job. It ranges from general knowledge such as reading and writing and facility in the use of numbers to knowledge related to crafts and trades and beyond this to the know- ledge required of the technician or at technical or professional level. While formal education is not essential, the requirements are most readily assessed in terms of school attendance, with the recognition that the equivalent knowledge may be ac- quired by other means. D E G R E E 1. Requires the ability to speak and understand English, and to = read, although instructions and reports may be entirely oral. Requires ability to count and to do simple addition and sub- traction of whole numbers. Equivalent to public school education, 2. Requires ability to perform simple arithmetic including fractions and decimals and to weigh or measure, using scales, weights, or measuring instruments such as simple calipers or gauges. Ability to f i l l in simple forms and make very simple reports in writing. May use simple drawings or charts. Equivalent to two years in high school or technical high school. 3. Requires knowledge beyond that specified for the second degree, such as ability to make calculations involving fractions, decimals, and percentages as in general shop or factory mathematics. Also may require operational-1 evel knowledge of a process or mechanical operation involving elementary science or familiarity with one or two precision measuring instruments. May involve reading of simple drawings or charts or the use of simple hand- book tables o r formulas. May require checking and posting or combining prewritten data, as in combir . icr. tallies to prepare a production report. May require some re^rLrr.g and inter- pretation of relatively straightforward — r h c e c r cstructions. Equivalent to four years of high school , -r t w o y= = r s of h i g h school plus the added educational r e c e i r e m e n t ; :f two or three years, of apprenticeship or e q u i v a l e n t T r a i n i n g . 4. Requires the ability to understand and use f a i r l y complicated drawings and specifications and k n o w i e d g e of f a i r l y c o m p l i : aced shop mathematics. May r e q u i r e considerable o p e r a t i o n a l knowledge of one o r m o r e p r o c e s s e s or mechanical o p e r a t i o n s or understanding of s e v e r a l precision measuring i n s t r u m e n t s . 190 - 6 - May require understanding of some technical t t s t r u c r i r z s in. such fields as electricity, hydraulics, mechanics, chemistry, radio, •where interpretation of terminology, symbols, or codes is necessar May require some elementary bookkeeping or interpretation of moderately involved written instructions or statements. Equiv- alent to full high school plus some specialized training such as that required of apprentices in carpentry, motor mechanics, or machine shops. Requires the ability to read and understand detailed blueprints and specifications of some complexity and to work therefrom, and sufficient shop mathematics or knowledge of a science to solve problems of moderate complexity requiring some originality and ingenuity. May also require the ability to understand and apply basic technical knowledge in such fields as electricity, radio, television, mechanics, chemistry, or forestry in situations of a highly skilled or technician level. Equivalent to full high school plus the equivalent of two years of technical college training or other specialized training usually taken in full-time attendance but may be carried out by part-time study as in qualifying for tool making, draftsman, electrician, radio or television technician, laboratory technician, or the like. Requires knowledge of fundamental principles of mechanics, chemistry, forestry, electricity, metallurgy, or the like to thoroughly understand complicated processes or mechanisms for the purpose of construction, repair, revision, or replace- ment. Equivalent to full university or technical college training in engineering. 191 - 7 - Factor 2 EXPERIENCE This factor appraises the length of time required for the necessary practice and learning on the particular job, or related or lower-level jobs which logically lead to the particular job under consideration, to prepare an average untrained individual to do a satisfactory or normal job. It is measured in terms of the number of days, weeks, months, or years of practice and on-the-job learning required by the employee to develop the physical and mental habits and skills required, such as precision, versatility, co-ordination, and dexterity. On repetitive, short cycle jobs requiring physical co-ordination and dexterity, ability to produce at ordinary or normal speed is the criterion. In machine-paced jobs, ability to perform the task to a satisfactory quality standard at the normal pace determined by the machine is the requirement which should be considered. When rating this factor, attention should be given to the number of different tasks which must be learned on the job, their requirements in practical "know-how", and the degree of accuracy or precision required. The allowance for experience should include breaking in time, such as on-the-job work experience as an apprentice, helper, or learner, special training courses provided by the company on company time, such as the vestibule type training, or time served as an understudy for learning purposes. However, do not credit here full-time school attendance already credited under education. In rating under this factor it is important to use the minimum time required for on-the-job training and experience if it were possible to advance the average worker as soon as he is ready. In practice a worker may be delayed by waiting for openings in jobs v/ith higher requirements, which in turn would provide training for further advancement, Care should also be taken to rate in terms of the average person rather than in terms of the exceptionally fast or the exceptionally slow person. D E G R E E 1. A few days up to one week. 2 . Two weeks to one month. 3 . One month to three months. 4. ' Three months to six months. 5 . Six months to one year. M o r e t h a n t h r e e y e a r s . 192 - 8 - Factor 3 C O M P L E X I T Y OF DUTIES This factor measures the demands of the job in creative ability or general intelligence. It includes ingenuity and initiative, planning, and the use of judgment. It involves the ability of the worker to meet new situations as they arise. "While this is partly a product of education and experience, it is the more intangible but real native ability which determines the results achieved. It is that aspect of capacity to perform which cannot be acquired through education or experience alone. In rating this factor the simplicity or complexity of the work situation should be considered, the number and variety of decisions, and the independence required due to lack of standards or lack of precedents available upon which to base such decisions. The significance of the decisions and the degree of supervision given should be taken into account. D E G R E E 1. Routine or highly repetitive work, simple in nature, in which the employee is allowed little or no choice of action, 2. Requires the application of clearly prescribed standard practices or involves working under close supervision or following detailed instructions. Some choice of action possible and some judgment required in applying standard practices or instructions to specific situations. 3. Requires the ability to plan and perform operations within a frame- work of semi-routine instructions or standards, or to make analyses of facts from which it is easy to determine logical answers as a guide to action. May make general decisions as to quality, oper- ational and set-up sequences, involving some judgment, but any- thing new or difficult is referred to supervisor. 4. Requires the ability to plan and perform a sect-—e of operations, where standardized procedure or recognized.— etd: d.s are available. Must evaluate factors, results, data, or trends, ar.d craw con- clusions, but decisions are generally based upon precedent or company policy, with unusual problems being referred to super- visor. 193 - 9 - Requires ability to work independently towards general results, making decisions involving the use of considerable ingenuity, initiative, and judgment. Only general methods are available as a guide and the work may involve devising procedures and methods. There is usually only general supervision. Requires independent judgment on involved and complex jobs. Usually requires analysis of a number of factors and the application of specialized technical knowledge to devise methods or procedures to achieve general objectives. Supervisor is primarily concerned with results. - 10 - Factor 4 M A N U A L D E X T E R I T Y REQUIRED This .£=_oror is intended to measure a value not found in the other factors, br. cpphhccg only to a limited number of jobs. .-rrcraise manual dexterity in terms of precision,, speed, and quick- ness of movements. Consider the degree of complex, intricate patterns of move- ment required, and the relative importance of integrating that kind of activity with others. Degree 1 represents the ordinary or normal dexterity level demanded by the majority of production jobs. DEGREE 1. Some accuracy, regularity and sequence of muscular movements and co-ordination involving simple hand operations, requiring little close timing of movement but limited to use within a narrow range of fairly simple hand tools, equipment, or operations. 2. A degree of manual dexterity requiring above average speed, quickness and precision of movement. 3. A considerable degree of manual dexterity requiring above average quickness and precision of movement with a high degree of integrated co-ordination with others. 4. A high degree of manual dexterity requiring a continuous high level of speed, precision and quickness of movement and a highly integrated and co-ordinated performance with other So - 11 - 1 9 5 Factor 5 PHYSICAL DEMAND This factor measures the requirements of the job in physical effort, strength, and endurance. It includes muscular exertion, continuity of effort, and the freedom or awkwardness of work positions. Consider the effort expended due to weight and frequency of handling of materials, in handling tools, or in operating a machine. Consider only those requirements which lead to fatigue in the normal course of the job. DEGREE 1. Light work with simple muscular movements and requiring only intermittent exertion such as standing, sitting, or walking. Mat- erials or tools handled only intermittently and are light. Easy work positions. Very light bench work, clerical tasks, or the duties of a night watchman would be typical. 2. Relatively light physical effort v/ith regular lifting or manipulation of light weight tools or materials or occasionally or intermittently with material or tools of average weight. Also might involve con- tinuous sitting or standing without freedom to change position at will, or considerable walking or climbing. Operation of machine or machine tools where machine time exceeds handling time. 3. Sustained physical effort with materials or tools of average weight. Operate several machines where handling time is equiv- alent to the total machine time. May involve awkward work positions. 4. Frequent pushing and pulling or lifting of heavy materials involving considerable physical effort over short periods. Also continuous strain of difficult work position, or work of a highly repetitive nature, machine paced, with relatively light materials. 5. Sustained physical exertion with materials of s~--^~:zze weight, or continuous difficult work positions. V/ork " h i e d i--.~~Z.~es lighter exertion but in which the maintenance of s p e c i f i e d s c e i d levels is a decided factor in fatigue. 6. Exceptionally heavy work with constant physical effort required, such as constant pushing and pulling or lifting of very he ivy materials. Also might involve work in very difficult v~ ork positions. 196 - 12 - Factor 6 MENTAL AND VISUAL DEMAND This factor appraises the mental and/or visual concentration required. Consider the alertness and attention necessary, the length of the operating cycle, the speed of the operation, and the coordination of manual dexterity with mental or visual attention. Care should be taken to distinguish the mental and/or visual demands factor from the characteristics considered under education and complexity of duties. In this factor consider only the fatigue-causing physical aspects of nervous and physical concentration, not the demands in abstract thinking and judgment which are measured by the other factors referred to. DEGREE 1. A minimum of mental and visual attention, as in an operation which is almost automatic, or in which mental and visual attention is required .only at relatively long intervals. 2. Frequent mental or visual attention, where the flow of work is intermittent or the position involves only the setting of a machine and waiting for the machine to complete a cycle. "Work requires little attention or checking during cycle. 3. Moderate mental and/or visual attention on acontinuous or almost continuous basis, such as in an operation where the flow of work is steady and repetitive or when constant alertness is required. However, sustained mental application over long periods is seldom required. 4. Close mental and visual attention to highly variable operations, or concentrated attention on planning and laying zzz complex work. •5, Concentrated mental and/or visual attentice zo zlzzly variable operations with considerable detail, or coccentra-ad attention to the planning and layout of very involved :=r.d complex jobs. - 13 - 197 Factor 7 RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUPERVISION This factor appraises the responsibility which the position involves for assisting, instructing, and directing others, and for planning their work for the most effective use of men, equipment, and material. Consider both the type and degree of responsibility and the number of people supervised. D E G R E E 1. The worker is responsible only for his own work, although he may work with, and exchange information with others. 2. Directs from one to five assistants or helpers, with responsibility for completion and quality of the work, but usually working with * those supervised. 3. Leader of a group, usually more than five in number but not exceeding ten to twelve. Responsible for assigning and checking work, with instruction and assistance as required. Trains new employees in unskilled jobs or semi-skilled jobs such as the operation of simple machines or tools. Performs same work as those supervised or closely related or more difficult aspects of the same work most of the time. May make out simple production and time reports, but supervisory and administrative duties should not require more than 25% to 35% of the time. Typical lead hand type of job. 4. Supervisor of a department, section, or unit, usually up to twenty-five to thirty persons but may be smaller if the work requires considerable individual instruction and assistance. Responsible for instructing, directing, and maintaining the flow of work and for directional authority within the group. Full-time ordinarily devoted to supervisory duties, which may include preparation of time and production reports anr. some co-ordination with other units. 5. Supervisor or foreman over a relatively l a r - e dspar-ment, usually exceeding twenty-five with full reGponsidi l i ty for p ; ar-:ing detailed procedures and methods, assigning w o r h . c o n t r c l l i r . - costs , and directing and supervising p e r s o n n e l . C err.plex forerr.a_- job or plant superintendent in a small p lant . - 14 - Factor 8 iSPONSIBILITY FOR S A F E T Y OF OTHERS This factor appraises the responsibility of the job holder for the oper- ation of a machine :r the handling of tools or equipment in such manner as to prevent or —hreirrhht-a injury to others. Consider the care which is necessary, the possibility of let her y, and the probable extent of injury should it occur. In this factor consider only the probability and severity of injury to others. Injury to the employee on the job being rated is considered under Hazards rather than under this factor. D E G R E E 1. The work does not involve much chance of injury to others. It may be in an isolated position, or may not involve the operation of equipment or tools, or the materials handled are so light as to preclude injury to others. 2. Only reasonable or ordinary care is required, and accidents, if they do occur, would be minor in nature - cuts, bruises, abrasions. 3. Careless performance of duties or failure to observe established safety regulations might result in accidents of sufficient serious- ness to others as to cause loss of work time, e.g. broken bones, crushed fingers, arms, feet, or legs, or eye injuries. 4. Constant care is required to prevent serious injury to others, such as in starting up equipment or operating equipment close to other workers when hazards are inherent, but in situations in which these other workers can act to prevent being injured. 5. The safety of other workers depends on the worker in the position being rated performing his job properly, and under such circum- stances that carelessness or inattention might result in fatal accidents to others who would have little chance of avoiding such accidents. Factor 9 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND PRODUCTS This f a r c e r appraises the responsibility of the employee for preventing loss or w c a r e of : a ~ materials through error and/or neglect, for preventing damage to the equip-— a c t caeadng financial loss or delays in production, and for defects in finished pro c e r t 5 . This factor is most conveniently measured by the possible cost o f mistakes or carelessness of the person who holds the job. The costs may be in wasted materials, spoiled products, damaged equipment, or production delays. In appraising this factor consider the probable cost in any one instance before detection. Do not consider extreme or rare possibilities. D E G R E E 1. E r ror s can be quite readily detected and cost of losses is negligible. Probable damage to material, equipment or products would not exceed ten dollars in any one instance. E r r o r s might ' cause some loss of the employee's time but no loss of production otherwise. 2. E r r o r s are likely to be detected in succeeding operations or by : regular inspection. Probable damage to equipment would not exceed $25. 00 in any one instance, while probable damage to, or waste of materials or products would seldom exceed $100. 00. Delays in processes would be minor. 3. E r r o r s would not be detected quickly through automatic checks or inspection. Some waste of materials or defective products might result in loss of $250 in any one case. Damage to equipment might be within the same range. Er ror s might cause loss of working time of others while repairs effected or material re-worked, 4. E r r o r s could have quite serious consequences, with equipment damage running to $1,000 and loss of materials or defective products causing loss up to $500. Alternatively, errors might cause significant loss of production time. 5. E r ror s might cause extensive losses due to the high degree of responsibility for materials, equipment, or final products. Damag to equipment might cause loss of several thousand dollars, and similar losses might result from loss of, or damage to, raw material. - Alternatively errors might cause serious production delays through failure to foresee needs and provide essential materials, parts, or equipment when required. - 16 - Factor 10 HAZARDS This factor appraises the hazards of the job, both health and accident. Consider only his. normal hazards of the position which remain even though all appropriate sad=-y devices have been installed and safety procedures are closely regulated. Also consider only the normal hazards to health when precautions are taken to safeguard employees. D E G R E E '" 1. The hazards are negligible due to the working conditions. 2. Probability exists of minor injuries such as cute, burns, bruises, etc. not involving lost time. 3. Some exposure to lost-time accidents, such as broken bones, loss of fingers, eye injuries, etc. Some exposure to occupational disease, but not of an incapacitating nature. 4. . Possibility exists of incapacitating accidents, such as injury in operating heavy equipment on construction where all conditions cannot be controlled, falls from scaffolds, or falling or flying materials; or exposure to electric shock or molten metals where injuries might be severe but would not normally cause death, Similarly, the job may have inherent hearth" hazards which would shorten working life but not prove fatal. 5. Exposure to accidents or disease which could result in total disability or death„ 201 - 17 - Factor 11 WOR KING CONDITIONS This factor appraises the disagreeableness of conditions and sur- roundings under which the job must be performed. Consider only those conditions which cannot be controlled by the individual. Appraise the severity and continuity of exposure to such elements as noise, dust, heat, wet, humidity, extreme cold, fumes, grease, acids or chemicals, vibrations,etc. Consider also jobs which, because of their location, would require the worker to live away from home part or all of the time, or which might involve travelling. Consider shift work as a disagreeable factor also unless it is compen-r sated for by a shift differential in wages. Also consider personal expense which might be involved in procuring protective clothing under conditions described in Degrees 4 and 5. (Add one degree if operator not supplied v/ith protective clothing or devices.) DEGREE 1. Good working conditions with absence of any disagreeable elements. 2. Good working conditions. Maybe slightly dirty or may involve occasional exposure to some of the elements listed, as heat, factory noise, fumes, etc. but not continuous. 3. Moderately disagreeable conditions due to exposure to one or more of the elements above. If several of the elements are present, exposure should not be continuous or severe. 4. Continuous exposure to one element which is particularly severe or disagreeable, such as heat or continuous fumes to the point of this factor being outstanding as a characteristic of the job. Alternatively there may be continuous expo-tire to three or more disagreeable elements, such as heat, dust. ar_i. noise, but no one alone being exceptionally disagreeable. Alsc —_~ht involve occasional exposure to very extreme cer_iitio~ 5 . 5. Continuous and intensive exposure t o s e v e r a l extremely dis- agreeable elements; u s u a l l y of such d e g r e e a s t o r e q u i r e the operator to wear a mask o r other protective device s"which a r e in themselves uncomfortable. INTERIOR SAWMILL INDUSTRY JOB E V A L U A T I O N M A N U A L 203 - 2 - The factors contained in this Manual are thirteen (13) in r c r r _ r e r fail into four (4) major groupings as follows: A. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL (relative weighting of which is approximately 20. 1%) 1. Job knowledge 2. On the job experience 3. Manual skill B. E F F O R T (relative weighting of which is approximately 16. 8%) 4. Physical effort 5. Visual effort 6. Judgment C. RESPONSIBILITIES (relative weighting of which is approximately 56. 7%) 7. Lumber recovery 8. Production flow 9. (a) Mobile equipment (b) Stationary and/or other production equipment (c) Auxiliary equipment 10. Safety of others 11. (a) External contacts (b) Internal contacts D. JOB CONDITIONS (relative weighting of which is approximately 6. 4%) 12. Personal hazards 13. Personal discomforts. On the pages which follow, each of these thirteen (13) factors are described and its application by factor degrees is defined. The degrees of each factor are used jointly by the Evaluators to determine how much one category differs from 204 1. JOB K N O W L E D G E This factor measures the minimum time required to obtain specialized or practical knowledge which is an integral part of the job. POINTS A . F r o m 4 and up to but not including 5 years. 200 B . F r o m 3 and up to but not including 4 years. 160 C . F r o m 2 and up to but not including 3 years. 120 D. F r o m 18 and up to but not including 24 months. 85 E . F r o m 12-and up to but not including 18 months.. 65 F . F r o m 9 and up to but not including 12 months. 45 G. F r o m 6 and up to but not including 9 months. 36 H. F r o m 4 and up to but not including 6 months. 27 I. F r o m 2 and up to but not including 4 months. 20 J. F r o m 1 and up to but not including 2 months. 15 K. F r o m 2 and up to but not including 4 weeks. 10 L . F r o m 1 and up to but not including 2 weeks. 6 M . F r o m 0 and up to but not including 1 week. 3 ON T H E JOB E X P E R I E N C E This factor measures the minimum time required to develop a reasonable standard of job performance. POINTS A . F r o m 18 and up to but not including 24 months. 85 B. F r o m 12 and up to but not including 18 months. 65 C. F r o m 9 and up to but not including 12 months. 45 D. F r o m 6 and up to but not including 9 months. 36 E . F r o m 4^nd up to but not including 6 months. 27 F . F r o m 2 and up to but not including 4 months. 20 G. F r o m 1 and up to but not including 2 months. 15 H. F r o m 2 and up to but not including 4 weeks. 10 I. F r o m 1 and up to but not including 2 weeks. 6 J. F r o m 0 and up to but not including 1 week. 3 MANUAL SKILL This factor measures the physical dexterity and physical co-ordination required. Speed of Movement Deliberate Quick Reflex A. High 80 100 120 B. Considerable degree 40 50 60 C. Above average degree 10 15 20 PHYSICAL E F F O R T This factor measures the intensity of the physical effort required. Frequency of Effort Occasional Frequent Continual A . Heavy work requiring more than ordinary endurance. 35 45 55 B. Moderate or heavy effort involving some fatigue 15 25 35 C. Light to moderate effort with little fatigue. 5 10 15 VISUAL E F F O R T This factor measures the degree and continuity of the visual exertion and alertness required. Speed of Operation Low Medium High A . Concentrated and exacting visual attention. 50 75 100 B. Close visual attention. 20 30 40 C... Normal visual attention. 5 10 15 JUDGMENT This factor measures the requirements of the job for the exercise of resourcefulness and independent judgment. Frequency of Decisions Complex decisions required involving the balancing of several factors Independent decisions required within standard practices and available guidelines. Routine decisions required. Occasional Frequent C ontinual 80 110 150 30 40 60 5 10 20 210 7. L U M B E R R E C O V E R Y This factor measures the responsibility for increasing and/or maintaining Recovery and/or Grade. Level Points. A . 240 B - 170 C. 100 D. 80 E . 60 •F. 40 G. 30 H. • 20 I. 10 PRODUCTION F L O W This factor measures the degree of influence exercised by the job function over inter-related job functions. Degree of Influence Low Considerable High A . Job function is critical to the flow of product. 30 60 100 B. . Job function is significant to the flow of product. 15 30 45 C. Job function is of minor significance to the flow of product. 10 15 212 EQUIPMENT This factor measures the importance of the equipment and its susceptibility to damage. (a) Mobile Equipment: A. Responsibility for heavy equipment and/or with large capacity. B. Responsibility for medium- sized equipment and/or with medium capacity. C. Responsibility for light equipment. (b) Stationary and/or Other Production Equipment: A. High degree of susceptibility to damage. B. Medium degree of susceptibility to damage. C. Low degree of susceptibility to damage. (c) Auxiliary Equipment: A. High degree of susceptibility to damage. B. Medium degree of susceptibility to damage. Low 90 30 10 30 20 10 50' 10 Value Medium 170 80 60 90 70 50 75 30 High 17/ 240 3/i> 140 110 150 120 90 100 50 C. Low degree of susceptibility to damage. 5 1C 15 S A F E T Y O F OTHERS This factor measures the responsibility for avoiding injury to others. Level of Hazard Low Moderate High A . Great care required. 20 25 30 B. Considerable care required. 8 12 16 C. Reasonable care required. 3 6 9 C O N T A C T S WITH OTHERS This factor measures the significance of contacts outside and within the operation. (a) External Contacts Frequency of Contacts Occasional Frequent Continual A . Crit ical 40 60 80 B. Significant C. Minor 20 30 40 (b) Internal Contacts A . Crit ical 50 100 150 B. Significant C. Minor 15 25 10 215 12. P E R S O N A L HAZARDS This factor measures the level of personal hazard. • " Frequency of Exposure Occasional Frequent Continual A . High risk 20 25 30 B. Moderate 10 13 18 C. Low risk 2 5 8 P E R S O N A L DISCOMFORT This factor measures the personal discomforts resulting from disagreeable elements (e. g. , heat, cold, kamp, noise, dust and fumes). A . Severe conditions Frequency of Exposure Occasional Frequent Continual 30 60 90 B. Disagreeable Conditions C. Basic Sawmill Conditions 10 3 15 6 20 10 ARTICLE VII - PLYWOOD JOB EVALUATION Section 1: Implementation The job eva luat ion program for the Plywood Industry, conducted pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement executed on the 22nd day of June, 1955, s h a l l be implemented by the Par t ie s hereto in accordance with the provi s ions of Supplement No. 2 to t h i s Agreement. Section 2: Po in t Range and Increment A l l jobs i n Group One, the po int range of which i s 0 to 81, s h a l l be pa id the minimum rate for common labour as p r o - vided in A r t . IX, Sec. 1. The po int range for subsequent groups s h a l l be ten (10), i . e . , Group Two (82-91), Group Three (92-101) , e t c . The v/age increment between succes- s ive groups from one to s i x i n c l u s i v e s h a l l be four cents (40) per hour, and between successive groups from and inc lud ing Group Seven, up to and inc luding the highest group, f ive cents (5c) per hour. Section 3: Red C i r c l e Jobs Incumbents i n job categories for which the wage rate i s reduced as a r e s u l t of job eva luat ion (hereinafter r e fe r red to as "red c i r c l e jobs") s h a l l continue at the o r i g i n a l rate u n t i l such time as job openings become ava i l ab le to them at equal or higher r a t e s . ARTICLE VIII - SAWMILL JOB EVALUATION I t i s agreed that a job evaluat ion program w i l l be estab- l i s h e d in the Coast Sawmill Industry . To implement t h i s program i t i s agreed that the fol lowing steps be taken; (a) A J o i n t Committee comprising two representat ives from each of the Part ies w i l l be e s t ab l i shed . (b) The s a id Committee w i l l develop a job evaluerhon manual. • (c) The Committee w i l l a l so prepare a job d e s r r i p t i e ~ £ for the r e q u i s i t e number of bench mark jobs. (d) The bench mark jobs v / i l l be a l loca ted po int ra t ings i n accordance with the manual. (e) The report of the Joint Committee herein established s h a l l be completed and made av a i l a b l e to the Parties before July 1, 1971. Source: Master Agreement, 1972-1973, Forest Products Industries Coast Region B r i t i s h Columbia, June 15, 1972. PLYWOOD JOB EVALUATION As referred to in Art. VII, Sec. 1 PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES The implementation and administration of the job evaluation program s h a l l be i n accordance with the p r i n c i p l e s and procedures set out i n a Manual dated September, 1955, and e n t i t l e d "Job Evaluation Manual for Operational Hourly Paid Jobs i n the Plywood Industry of B r i t i s h Columbia" as amended July, 1966 (herein referred to as the "Manual.") INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION COMMITTEE There s h a l l be a committee constituted and named the Industry Job Evaluation Committee (herein r e f e r r e d to as the "Plywood Evaluation Committee") to c o n s i s t of one member representative of Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations Limited, and one member representative of Regional Council No. 1, Inter- n a t i o n a l Woodworkers of America. FUNCTION OF PLYWOOD EVALUATION COMMITTEE (a) The Plywood Evaluation Committee s h a l l as- sume general r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the adminis- t r a t i o n of the job evaluation program. (b) The unanimous decision of the said Committee s h a l l be f i n a l and binding on the Parties hereto. PLANT JOB REVIEW COMMITTEE (a) There s h a l l be a committee constituted in each plywood plant named the Plant Job Review Committee (herein referred to as "Review- Committee") to consist of two members repre- sentative of Management and two members representative of the employees. At least one representative of Management tncst be a member of the Plant's s a l a r i e d s t a f f cr Management, and at l e a s t one representative of the employees must be an employee of rfr_e Plant whose job is subject to Plywood Job Evaluation. Management may choose the i r second representative from amongst persons not employed at the plant, and the Union may do likewise except that neither party may choose as i t s representative a member of the Plywood Evaluation Committee or any person who is employed as a job evaluator by Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations Limited or by Regional Council No. 1 of the I.W.A. (b) The Company s h a l l reimburse any of i t s hourly-paid employees for time l o s t while acting as a member of the Review Committee or while presenting information, regarding his own job, before a r e g u l a r l y convened meeting of the Review Committee. The Company s h a l l not be responsible for remunerating employee representatives who are not i t s hourly-paid employees. FUNCTION OF REVIEW COMMITTEE (a) The Review Committee w i l l be responsible for seeing that a l l requests for evaluation or re-evaluation of jobs are adequately and accurately documented before being passed to the Plywood Evaluation Committee for further a c t i o n . The documents required w i l l include a "Request for Job Evaluation" form sub- mitted ei t h e r by an i n d i v i d u a l employee or by l o c a l Management, and a f u l l y completed Job Description which provides s u f f i c i e n t information for the subsequent work of the Plywood Evaluation Committee. The form of the documents, the procedures for submitting ' and handling them, and the time l i m i t s for completion may be amended as required by the Plywood Evaluation Committee under the authority given them by A r t i c l e 3 of this supplement. (b) Decisions of the Review Committee respecti-g the appropriateness of a request for evalua- t i o n or re-evaluation, or respecting- the adequacy and accuracy of documents, s h a l l be by unanimous agreement. F a i l i n g such agree- ment within the established time i i r . i t , the Review Committee s h a l l , at the r e — t e s t of any one of i t s members, immediately forward the Request for Job Eva lua t ion , together wi th any other documents on which there is unanimous agreement, to the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee and s h a l l then have no further r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for documenting that request . (c) When the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee has made a d e c i s i o n respect ing the eva luat ion of a job, i t s h a l l communicate that d e c i s i o n to the appropriate Review Committee. The Review Committee w i l l be responsible for informing Management and the employees concerned, g i v i n g reasons for the outcome where these are a v a i l - a b l e . A d e c i s i o n of the Review Committee that an A p p l i c a t i o n for Job Evaluat ion should not be forwarded to the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee w i l l , s i m i l a r l y , be communicated with reasons to those concerned. (d) Nothing in t h i s A r t i c l e l i m i t s the r i g h t of the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee to determine the facts about any job, by d i r e c t i o n , o b s e r v a - t i o n or otherwise, or to amend any job d e s c r i p - t i o n or s p e c i f i c a t i o n submitted to them i n support of a Request for Job Evaluat ion form. APPLICATION OF PROGRAM The job eva luat ion program s h a l l apply to a l l employees i n the plywood industry except Journeymen Tradesmen, Improvers, Helpers and Powerhouse and Broom Crews. DIRECTION OF WORK Job eva luat ion descr ip t ions are wr i t t en with the intent to set for th the general dut ies and r e q u i r e - ments of the job and s h a l l not be construed as imposing any r e s t r i c t i o n on the r i g h t o f the Company to ass ign dut ies to employees other than those s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioned in job de sc r ip t ions , provided always that i f the assignment of such duties changes the job content s u f f i c i e n t l y ~z j u s t i f y a review of the evaluat ion the P l y v r e o d Evaluat ion Committee s h a l l make such a r e r i e v ir. accordance with the procedure set out h e r e : - . 222 8. RE-EVALUATION (a) When a job is re-evaluated, due to changes i n job content, i t s h a l l not be moved to another grade unless the change in job content to ta l s five or more points . (b) When a job has moved to another grade as a r e s u l t of re -eva lua t ion , the wage rate for the new grade s h a l l be e f f e c t i v e on the date that Management or the employee has appl ied to the Review Committee for r e -eva lua t ion . (c) When a job i s moved to a lower grade as a r e s u l t of re -eva lua t ion , the incumbent s h a l l maintain h i s job rate as a red c i r c l e rate subject to the provis ions of Paragraph 10(b) h e r e i n . 9. NEW JOBS CREATED Where the Company has exercised i t s r i g h t to create a new job, a temporary rate s h a l l be set by Manage- ment. The permanent rate for the said job as determined by the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee s h a l l be e f f e c t i v e as of the date the job was i n s t a l l e d , provided always that new jobs s h a l l not become red c i r c l e jobs. 10. RED CIRCLE JOBS (a) The company s h a l l supply the Union wi th a l i s t of employees holding red c i r c l e jobs, the said l i s t to include the name of the employee, name of job category f i l l e d , the evaluated rate for the job, and the ac tua l rate p a i d . (b) Where a job vacancy i s posted, employees on red c i r c l e rates equal to or lower than the rate of the job posted, must apply in accordance with s e n i o r i t y for the sa id vacancy or r ever t to the evaluated rate for the job then h e l d . (c) Employees on red c i r c l e rates who are prone red to a higher grade s h a l l regain the red c i r c l e rate i f subsequently found incompetent to continue in the higher grade. 223 (d) Employees holding red c i r c l e jobs who are demoted during a reduct ion of forces , s h a l l be paid only the evaluated rate for the job to which they are ass igned. I f at a l a t e r date an employee i s reassigned to h i s former job he s h a l l regain h i s red c i r c l e r a t e . (e) When the Company terminates a job, or a job i s not occupied during a per iod of one year, a record as to the c a n c e l l a t i o n of the app l i cab le job d e s c r i p t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a - t i o n s h a l l be e s t ab l i shed . (f) I f an employee i s temporari ly t ransferred at the request of the Company he s h a l l r e t a i n h i s e x i s t i n g rate or receive the rate for the new job, whichever i s h igher . On re turn to h i s regular job the sa id employee s h a l l regain his red c i r c l e r a t e . 11. SENIORITY (a) Subject to the prov i s ions herein set out , A r t . XVIII (Senior i ty) s h a l l continue to apply . (b) Promotions s h a l l be made only where a vacancy e x i s t s . 12. REFERRAL PROCEDURE (a) When the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee has decided the outcome of a Request for Job Eva lua t ion , i t s h a l l transmit i t s dec i s ion to the appropriate Plant Job Review Committee. (b) When an employee's request for re-eva luat ion r e s u l t s i n no change being made in the job grade, or in a reduct ion , or when a Manage- ment request re su l t s in no change or in an increase, the Plywood Evaluat ion Committee s h a l l g ive to the appropriate Review Committee a short statement of the reas~_s for the d e c i s i o n . The statement should not go into great d e t a i l , but should vr,dicara the c r i t e r i a used in s u f f i c i e n t depth to show the appl icant that the request was given adequate a t t e n t i o n . (c) An evaluation done by the Plywood Evalua- t i o n Committee s h a l l be f i n a l and binding on the parties but, at any time a f t e r f i v e years since the l a s t evaluation or r e - evaluation of a job. Management or an ind i v i d u a l employee may submit a request for re-evaluation of that job and no other reason than the elapsed time s h a l l be necessary. (d) I f the Plywood Evaluation Committee i s unable to reach agreement regarding the d i s p o s i t i o n of a Request for Job Evaluation or any other matter regarding the job evaluation program which f a l l s within t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n , the matter s h a l l be referred to Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations Limited and to the I.W.A. Regional Council for settlement. (e) A l l communication between any Plant Review Committee and the Plywood Evaluation Committee referred to above s h a l l be effected by send- ing one copy to the Union representative or representatives on the committee and one copy to the Employer representative or representa- t i v e s . In the case of communications to a Plant Review Committee, the Union representa- t i v e s w i l l be addressed care of the o f f i c e of the appropriate Union Local and the Employer representative care of the Company's o f f i c e s at the plant. In the case of communications to the Plywood Evaluation Committee, the Union representative w i l l be addressed care of the o f f i c e s of Regional Council No. 1 of the I.W.A., Vancouver, and the Employer representative care of the o f f i c e s of Forest I n d u s t r i a l Relations Limited. 13. TRAINING PROGRAM A program of t r a i n i n g for members of the Re v i e * ' Committee i n each plant s h a l l be i n s t i t u t e d , -z±= d e t a i l s of which s h a l l be arranged by Fores- I n d u s t r i a l Relations Limited and the I.W.A, Regional Council. Source: Master Agreement, 1972-1973, Fores- Products Industries Coast Region B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , June 15, 1972. 225 P L Y W O O D INDUSTRY J O B E V A L U A T I O N P R O G R A M - ~ ? ? 7 7 •= - ? . : - T T G ^ 7 f P l a n t . P r e p a r e d R e v i s e d : | J o b T i t l e : ; R e v i s e d : j N u m b e r of s h i f t s • N u m b e r of i n c u m b e n t s p e r sh i f t i 1. S T E P B Y S T E P A C T I V I T I E S O N M A I N J O B and P R O D U C T S H A N D L E D ' 2. M A K E A N D M O D E L O F A N Y E Q U I P M E N T O P E R A T E D B Y I N C U M B E N T 3. E Q U I P M E N T R E S P Q N S 161 L I T Y ( s e t t i n g , a d j u s t i n g a n d / o r s e r v i c i n g ) 4. R E L A T E D D U T I E S ( c l e a n - u p of e q u i p m e n t , of imrneci- . ' .= ~ : r.-. a r e a , a n d e t h e r o d d j o b s ) i i 226 - P a g e 2 - P l a n t : J o b T i t l e : 5. R E G U L A R . O R O C C A S I O N A L R E L I E F D U T I E S ( l i s t the c ; : - ; s e dut ie s and the r a t e of pay} J o. R E G U L A R O R O C C A S I O N A L R E P O R T S , T A L L I E S A N D / O R R E C O R D S I (list titles, purpose and disposal - a t t a c h s a m p l e ) 7. Who supervises y o u r w o r k ? Do you direct others? How many and whom? 8. What physical aspect of your job do y o u p e r f o r m most, and what is the heaviest w o r k you do? 9. How could y o u i n j u r e s o m e o n e o t h e r t h a n y o u r s e l f ? 10. How could you get i n j u r e d ? 11. Do y o u w o r k i n s i d e o r o u t s i d e ? What d i s a g r e e a b l e o r u n c o m f o r t a b l e c o n d i t i o n s a r e y o u exposed t o ? 1 T H I S J O B D E S C R I P T I O N H A S B E i P R O V I S I O N S O F T H E R E L A T E D E N C O M P L E T E D IN P L Y W O O D S U P P L E ; .-. I C O R D A N I E W I T H T H E | R E V I E W C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R j F O R T H E I. W. A . i S R E V I E W d :, I * O R IvlANA'v M M I T T E E M E M B E R S 1 V E M E N T 1 j ' ( s i g n a t u r e s ) i t I PLYWOOD INDUSTRY JOB EVALUATION PROG?. 227 j REQUEST FOR JOB EVALUATION •Name of Company and Division i t S ;Present Category Title • Pre sent Category Grade IP re sent Category Rate jDate Submitted iName of Applicant • { S T A T E SPECIFIC REASON(S) FOR THIS REQUEST i i i ! FOR REVIEW C O M M I T T E E ONLY t jThis request for job evaluation must be duly completed and must be {accompanied by a current job description in Order to ensure consideration jby the Plywood Evaluation Committee. i — — iDate Request Acted On i ^Disposition and Reason(s) i t R E V I E W C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S R E V I E W C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S {FOR T H E I . W . A . F O R M A N A G E M E N T l (s ignatures) FOR PLYWOOD EVALUATION C O M M I T T E E ONI.T Date Request for Job Evaluation Received Date Request for Job Evaluation Finalized Disposition and Reason(s) ( F O R T H E I . W , A . F O R T H E I N D U S T R COSTS: JOB EVALUATION Southern I n t e r i o r Sawmills B.C. Coast Sawmills 1. 7000 men 2. i n i t i a l j.e. coverage 1735 (25%) 3. 42 plants 4 « 1735 = 41 men/plant 42 5. i n s t a l l a t i o n period? 7 months (June 1971 - Dec. 1971) 6. manpower required: 8% men (2 man teams (4)) + 1 man part time 1. 28000 men 2. estimated j.e. coverage 7000 (25%) 3. 70 plants 4 » 7000 = 100 men/plant 70 5. maximum i n s t a l l a t i o n period: 7 months 6. manpower estimates based on S. I n t e r i o r experience 34 men (4 x 8%) necessary to complete job descrips. i n 7 month period. Cost Breakdown Development phase 1967 - 1969 (3 years) hired consultants f u l l time to plan, design program: $100/day each 2 men working 200 days/yr, for 3 years = $120,000 expenses, mats 3 0,000 Total $150,000 I n s t a l l a t i o n phase 7 months (30 weeks) from June'71 to Jan'72 average cost per man/hr.= 4.7$ 40 hr. week x 30 weeks x 4.7* hr. x 1735 men = $97,845 Development phase 1966 - 1973 (7 years) at l e a s t one man from FIR working on j.e. f u l l time over 7 year period: 1 man @ 12,000/yr.= $84,000 materials, expenses, etc. 16,000 $100,000 (this cost i s a "sunk" cost now) I n s t a l l a t i o n phase desire max. 7 month period (requiring 34 men) desire 5$ per man/hr. 40 hr. week x 30 weeks x 5<: hr. x 7000 men - $420,000 (estimated) Grand T o t a l : $247,845 Grand Total $520,000 23U 3. Administration: estimated $25,000 -$50,000 per year - t o t a l H IFLRA % Union (IWA) Closer to $50,000 - salary for 2 men each side + materials, expenses 3. Administration: est. $25000-$50,000 per year each side - salary 2 men - t r a v e l l i n g expenses - material - at l e a s t 2 x budget for S. I n t e r i o r because 4 x as large

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 6 0
France 1 0
City Views Downloads
Henderson 4 0
Unknown 1 10
Wilkes Barre 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items