q0 o,~ #YI)HEARING DATE OF AWAOO.

Transcription

1 .' q0 o,~ #Y)HEARNG DATE OF AWAOO. OPAC AWARD PETERBOROUGH Aug.16/90 ~ N THE MATTER OF THE POLCE ACT R.S.O. 1980, CHAPTER 381 AND N THE MATTER OF AN ARBTRATON Between THE BOARD OF COMMSSONERS OF POLCE FOR THE CTY OF PETERBOROUGH (hereinafter referred to as the "Board") - and THE PETERBOROUGH POLCE ASSOCATON (hereinafter referred to as the "Association") AND N THE MATTER OF 1990 COLLECTVE AGREEMENT ARBTRATOR: DR. ARJUN P. AGGARWAL APPEARANCES: For the Board Bruce Stewart Q.C. Tim Liznick Judge Hugh Waddell Keven McAlpine Counsel Counsel Chairman Chief of Police For the Association Scott Kirkland Randy Donaldson Ted Boy ton Brian Fitzgerald David Humber Spokesman President Bargaining Chairman Member Member The hearing in this matter was held on August 1, 1990, in Peterborough, Ontario.

2 AWARD The undersigned was appointed by the Solicitor-General, Honourable Steven Offer, on July 3, 1990, pursuant to Section 32 of The Police Act, R.S.O., Chapter 381, to act as an arbitrator to hear and determine all matters in dispute between the parties relating to their 1990 Collective Agreement negotiations. The hearing in this matter was held in Peterborough, Ontario, on August 1, The parties, at the outset, agreed that the arbitrator had been properly appointed and that the time limits prescribed by the Act for the commencement of the arbitration hearing have been complied with. t was also agreed that the issues before this arbitrator are for the Collective Agreement for the year 1990, i.e. from the 1st of January to 31st of December, NTRODUCTON The City.of Peterborough is located east of Metro politan Toronto, in the heart of the Kawartha Lakes Region. t is the largest urban centre in east central Ontario. Peterborough is a popular tourist centre, connected by major highways to the large urb~n areas of the Province (downtown Toronto is only 130 km or 80 miles away). The City has a population of about 62,500 persons. n addition, Peterborough is the home of both Trent University

3 3 and Sir Sandford Fleming College with an estimated student population of approximately 7,000. As the City is situated in the Kawartha Lakes Tourism Area, it also provides many services to the surrounding region with an estimated summer population of 184,000. n addition to tourism, Peterborough's large industries include: Canadian General Electric, Quaker Oats, Fisher Gauge Ltd., Ethicon/Surgkos, The City of Peterborough and Kendall Canada. is growing both physically and economically. n 1989, city streets mileage increased by seven (7) ki10metres and there were five hundred and fity six (556) houses built. From January, 1990, to April, 1990, another one hundred and twenty-five (125) houses were completed. The Peterborough Police Force has a present strength of 107 Uniform Police Officers. The last Collective Agreement between the parties was for two years 1989 & However, the Collective Agreement allows the Association to bargain for an improvement in salaries for the year 1990: The undersigned have agreed that in accordance with Article (23) "Term of Agreement" of the current contract, the only Article open to negotiation, and if so required~ arbitration, in 1990 shall be Article (22) "Salaries" and the attached Appendix Salary Schedule. The Association served a notice to bargain for 1990

4 4 salaries for the Uniform Officers on December 8, The parties entered into negotiations on Salaries on December 21, for the 1990 Agreement At the outset, both the parties signed the following "Agreement of Non-Disclosure": Both the Board of Commissioners of Police for the City of Peterborough and the Peter borough Police Association recognize that for the bargaining process to be successful there must be a free exchange of ideas and positions during the bargaining process. n order to ensure such free exchange, both parties hereby agree that should this matter proceed to arbitration, neither party will disclose to the arbitrator, any idea, posi tion, offer or proposal made by the other party during the bargaining process. The parties met in five negotiating sessions between December 21, 1989 and June 7, Unfortunately, they failed to reach a settlement, which led to this arbitration. n spite of the parties' failure to reach a settlement, the relations between the parties appears to be very cordial, open and respectful, for which congradulate them. t may be mentioned that the parties had settled their last two- year Collective Agreement without the assistance of an arbitrator. At the hearing before the arbitrator, each of the parties submitted extensive written briefs which were supported by exhibits, charts and other material. full opportunity to make presentations They were then afforded in support of their respective positions.

5 5 Subsequent to the hearing,.received a letter from the Board's Counsel, Mr. Bruce H. Stewart, disputing the information provided by the Association regarding the real estate prices. think it would be appropriate to disclose the contents of that letter. t reads: August 3, 1990 BY COURER Dr. A. Aggarwal, Co-ordinator, Labour-Management Studies College, Confederation P.O. Box 398, Thunder Bay, Ontario, P7C 4Wl Dear Dr. Aggarwal: Re: Peterborough Police 1990 Salary Arbitration was concerned with the information contained in Table 3 of the Association's Brief concerning house prices~ Mr. Liznick of our office contacted the Canadian Real Estate Association from which the Police Association indicated they had obtained the information. The Table is incorrect in several respects. Firstly, no separate "house" prices are maintained by the Association for Gloucester and Nepean; rather Gloucester and Nepean prices are including along with prices for Kanata, Vanier and the City of Ottawa. Thus the figures shown on Table 3 purporting to be from Gloucester and Nepean are not reliable. Secondly, the Association does not segregate house prices from multiple unit

6 6 residential dwellings (up to six units). Thus the prices shown would also reflect the sales of these smaller and medium sized apartment buildings. Obviously sales of more expensive properties could very much affect the so-called average. Moreover, in the case of a smaller municipality like Peterborough the average could be heavily influenced by a number of high price sales in a month because of the relatively lower number of sales that would be reported in a month as contrasted with a larger area like the Ottawa region. Finally, we have been informed by the Association that the prices given for January, 1990 and January, 1989 by the Association in Table 3 are not accurate and bear no resemblance to any figures ever pro vided by the Canadian Real Estate Association. enclose a copy of Mr. Liznick's letter to that Association which sets out the accurate figures. You will see that there is quite a difference. n particular, the new figures bear out our contention that our economy is in a recession (at the very least) as the May, 1996 average prices have in six of the eight municipalities, including Peterborough, declined over those in effect in January, repeat my statements made during the hearing that the information obtained from the Real Estate Association cannot be used to compare between municipalities. There is no attempt made to ensure that all types and quality of housing is represented in the statistic; it can be easily affected by a preponderance of lower quality or higher quality housing in a particular month. Moreover, as stated above, when the sales of housing in other areas like Ottawa and Vanier are gouped in with Gloucester and Nepean it is inaccurate and grossly misleading to report that the average price is attributable to Nepean or Gloucester. BHS/ik Encl. Yours truly B.H. Stewart cc: Chief Keven McAlpine Peterborough Police Force Peterborough Police Association

7 7 TABLE Location January 1989 January 1990 May 1990 Brantford $116,140 $140,822 $137,282 Guelph 154, , ,084 Kingston 122, , ,413 Ottawa 137, , ,277 North Bay 96, , ,905 Sarnia 99, , ,366 Sault Ste. 65,465 89, ,521 Marie Peterborough 122, , ,693 THE SSUE N DSPUTE At the time of the appointment of the arbitrator, there was only one matter in dispute arising out of the Association's requests. The parties agreed that the salaries for Uniform Officers was the only issue before this arbitrator for his determination. SALARES - ARTCLE 22 The 1989 salary for the First Class Constable was $42, The Association has requested an 8.95 per cent increase over the 1989 salaries. t is my understanding that once the percentage increase for the rank of First Class Constable is awarded, the salary increases for other ranks will be calculated by the parties according to the

8 8 provisions in their present Collective Agreement. The Association justifies its claim for an 8.95 per cent increase on the following grounds: a) The level of remuneration must be such as to attract and retain career motivated individuals who either possess or have the ability to acquire the leadership, academic, technical and management skills to satisfy the unparallelled and peculiar requirements of a Police organization in our highly complex and demanding society. b) The level of remuneration must recognize the full commitment of the officer to his duty and give full recognition to the unique conditions of Police service. c) Remuneration must encourage a high level of performance and provide the incentive to advance and accept greater responsibility. d) A level of remuneration must be provided which is equitable in the Police milieu and which ensures that members with the Force may enjoy a standard of living comparable to that of their peers. e) A level of remuneration must be provided which compensates for continuous or periodic exposure to special conditions of employment involving abnormal hazard, responsibility and unusual confines.

9 9 The Association submitted that historically the Peter borough Police Force is compared with the following Forces: Brantford Gloucester Guelph Kingston Nepean North Bay Sarnia Sault Ste. Marie. According to the Association, the Peterborough Police Force has never been higher than 7th in the above comparison group. Thus, it feels, because of the physical and economic changes that have occurred in the City of Peterborough, as well as the proven credentials of the Members of the Force, this positioning in the comparison group should change. The Association further argues that increase in cost of living, municipal taxes and house prices also justify its request for an 8.95 per cent increase. t states that: Real Estate prices, which are a barometer of the cost of living in each community, have increased in Peterborough at a rate faster than all Cities in our comparison group other than Sault Ste. Marie and Brantford. t is hard to even compare with Sault Ste. Marie as the price of their average home sold is close to $45,000 cheaper. (See Table 3.) t should be noted that as of May, 1990 the only City in our comparison group where the average cost of homes sold was more expensive than in Peterborough, was Guelph.

10 10 TABLE First Class Constable Salary Comparison (Association Table) CTY Brantford 33,856 35,549 38,042 40, ,168 45,592 Gloucester 34,649 36,382 38,447 40,101 42,737 46,494 Guelph 34,746 36,859 38,667 40,737 42,917 Kingston 34,772 36,890 38,661 40,362 43,028 Nepean 34,653 36,763 38,530 40,778 43,459 '46,544 North Bay 34,978 36,727 38,380 40,395 42,516 Sarnia 33,456 35,494 37,473 39,755 42,167 45,395 ' sault Ste. 34,694 36,300 38,318 40,500 42,525 44,500 Note $200. above Marie ave. of comparisol group Total Average = Peterborough 33,563 35,745 37,604 40,100 42,450 Difference= Ranking 8th 7th 8th 8th 7th (out of 9) Finally, in support of its position, the Association pointed out that the City of Peterborough has given to its administrators pay increases ranging from 7.5 per cent to 11.5 per cent for the year 1990, which it argues further

11 11 justifies its request f9r an 8.95 per cent increase for the Uniform Officers. The Board, on the other hand, has offered a 5.5 per cent across the boarj increase over the 1989 salaries. The Board's proposed increase produces a First Class Constable rate of pay to $44, for the year The Board has suggested that the pattern of community settlements should be the predominant consideration. Mr. Stewart, Counsel for the Board, argued that "Arbitrators have almost unanimously considered community standards to be the sinqle most siqnificant criterion in determining the wages of police officers. The criterion is applicable in 1990 when the large number of freely negotiated private sector settlements reached in the Peterborough area in the past five months have established the pattern which makes the task much easier". TABLE 1 PETERBOROUGH COMMUNTY & AREA WAGE SETTLEMENTS PRVATE SECTOR Quaker Oats Company 6.0% 5.0% Fisher Gauge 4.5% 5.2% Surgikos 5.0% 4.8% Sargent of Canada 6.0% Average 5.167% 5.25% Peterborough First Class Contable 5.86% 5.5% proposed

12 12 TABLE 2 PETERBOROUGH COMMUNTY - WAGE SETTLEMENTS PUBLC SECTOR 1989 Peterborough County 6.2% Board of Education (Sept. (O.S.S.T.F.) 1/89) Peterborough Separate 6.0% School Board (Sept. 1/89) Library Board City of Peterborough (nside Workers) City of Peterborough (Outside Workers) 4.0% 5.0% 5.3% Trent University 5.6% i) professors (June 30/90) ii) support s~aff 4.75% Peterborough Utilities 5.2% Commission Average 5.26% Peterborough First Class Constable 5.86% 1990 n/a C.P.. as at June 30, 1990 for % (to Aug. 31/91) 5.5% 5.6% 6.0% n/a 5.25% 5.5% 5.36% 5.5% proposed n support of its position, the Board pointed out that in Table 2 above, with the exception of Trent University, indicates the Municipal Settlement level which is in the 5.5% area for 1990.

13 13 Library Board City nside Workers City Outside Workers P.U.C. 5.5% 5.6% 6.0% 5.5% Thus, the Board argues that the 5.5% wage increase for 1990 represents the normative community wage increase for Why should the community be expected to support a greater percentage increase for police officers, particularly in light of their historical wage record. The Board further points out that the Peterborough Police Force, between , has consistently received wage settlements superior to those other sector employees: TABLE 3 PETERBOROUGH PC-1 SALARY COMPARED TO ONTARO PUBLC SECTOR, (Base = 100 in 1983) Year Public Sector Peterborough Police Force st Q based on proposal

14 14 TABLE 4 PETERBOROUGH PC-1 SALARY NCREASES COMPARED TO PRVATE SECTOR, (Base = 100 in 1983) Year Private Sector Peterborough Police Force st Q (based on proposal) TABLE 5 PETERBOROUGH PC-1 COMPARED TO CANADA LOCAL ADMNSTRATON (Base = 100 in 1983) Year Local Administration (Canada) Peterborough Police Force st Q ll (based on?roposal)

15 15 According to the Board, the cities of Gloucester and Nepean, because of their proximity to the city of Ottawa, are not truly comparable forces. The Board, thus, provided the following Police Forces for the purposes of salary comparisons: TABLE 6 COMPARABLE MUNCPALTES Size in 1987 Police Number of Force Officers City Average Population' ncome Peterborough ,500 $19,912 Sarnia 88 46,448 23,357 Timmins 71 46,000 20,810 Cornwall 80 46,000 18,010. Kingston ,243 21,496 Barrie 82 57,120 21,357 Brantford ,465 19,717 Sault Ste. Marie ,905 19,770 North Bay 84 52,000 19,535 Guelph ,500 22,157 Average 99 61,210 20,612 t may be noted that from its list of comparable forces, the Board has excluded two cities - Gloucester and Nepean, but had added three more cities - Timmins, Cornwall and Barrie. The Board further states that the average wage increase for the comparator forces for 1989 over 1988 was 5.70%; Peterborough Police received a comparable rate of 5.86%.

16 16 TABLE 7 END RATE % NCREASES FOR COMPARATOR CTES City 1989 over 1988 Peterborough 5.86 Sault Ste. Marie 5.00 Sarnia 6.07 Brantford 5.00 Barrie 6.23 Cornwall 6.31 Guelph 5.35 Kingston 6.61 North Bay 5.25 Timmins 5.06 Average 5.67 Nepean 6.57 Gloucester 7.08 Average 5.87 Mr. Stewart argued that Peterborough PC-1 salary increases have consistently exceeded the Ontario C.P.. (i.e. the rate of inflation); by 0.85%. Given the current Ontario C.P.. level of 4.5% and the national rate of 4.3%, it is the Board's contention that a wage increase of 5.5% more than protects police salaries against inflation erosion and is consistent with the previous settlement pattern vis a vis CP increases. The Board finally submitted that "What is proposed in 1990 would increase rates by 5.5%. While this may appear to be less favourable than the current 1990 provincial average of 6.44%, we submit that the higher increases received by

17 17 Peterborough PC-lover the past 6 years plus the lower community settlements in Peterborough justify a relatively lower increase in 1990". The Association has made its submissions basically on police to police comparison in actual dollar amount of salaries for the last six years. On the other hand, the thrust of the Board's argument was on the comparison with municipal, industrial and other public sector employees(though it had not outright rejected the police to police comparisonl. Further, the Board's emphasis was on comparison of percentage increases instead of actual dollar amount for several years. The arbitrator has serious reservations about the validity of the percentage comparisons over the extended period of time. The next question which emerges from the Board's argument is whether the police officers deserve a salary increase higher than municipal or industrial employees. f so, why? Arbitrator Joyce in The City of Ottawa Civilian Employees Award (May 7, 1990), addressed a similar concern and explained why the Uniform Officers should be awarded wages better than other employees in the community. He states: Over the past ten or so years salary increases to members of the Uniform Forces throughout the Province, both negotiated and awarded, have exceeded average community wage increases. Certainly have on a number of occasions awarded increases to Uniform staff that were in excess of levels that were gained by

18 18 employees working in many occupations. Why was this justified? Because, the responsibilities and pressures placed on members of the Uniform staff have increased over the past few years to such an extent that their earlier salary levels if adjusted only by community salary increased would today be quite inappropriate. At page 14, he listed a number of factors making the world of a Police Officer more difficult than in past years: -The impact of illegal drugs. -A broader ethnic population with accompanying increased racial tension. -Broader rights granted those unfortunate persons with mental health problems, with accompanying increased exposure to the general public. -ncreased employment of suspended and lighter sentences of those found guilty of crimes may be of long-term social assistance and may be necessary because of prison overcrowding but at least in the short term the job of the Uniform Force has been made more difficult. -The same is true for what perceive to be less stringent parole requirements. -The Young Offenders Act has increased defiance of the law, decreased respect for law enforcement, and has multiplied the difficulties of those charged with the responsibility for the protection of the innocent. -The media's increased and unceasing search for the negative has placed unfair social and job pressures on the vast number of members of Uniform Forces who are doing an outstanding job; media attention is riveted on the very few "bad apples" and on honest mistakes usually occurring under extreme pressures, with little positive to be found in the headlines. -The danger of a scuffle with a person carrying the ADS virus is a peril unheard of just a few short years ago.

19 19 -n general, less respect for others and for the law, including by many reasonably responsible citizens. One may not agree with each and every word Arbitrator Joyce had said in this regard, but it leaves no doubt that the job functions o~ police officers, in present day society, are hazardous and stressful. APPROPRATE CRTERA Every interest arbitration raises the same question, what criteria should be used in determining the wages and benefits for the municipal police forces? The parties often suggest a variety of criteria, and adduce, perhaps under standably, conflicting data to support their respective positions. Both the Board and the Association rely and submit various comparables for the arbitrator's Generally, these figures are diametrically consideration. opposite to each other. There are all sorts of salary comparisons; and each party can find one to suit and justify its own positions and goals. This frustration with comparisons has been frequently expressed by the arbitrators. The arbitrators have not yet come to grips with this problem because there is no scientific universally accept~ble formula for comparisons. t should be recognized that an absolute wage parity even among comparable police forces is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. However, if the wage gap between

20 20 comparable forces is not gradually narrowed, it may grow to a disproportionate limit. Moreover, an abnormal wage disparity among comparable forces, in the long run, may affect the force's morale and productivity as well as employer- employee relations. The Association may have a legitimate concern to see that the salary of its members does not fall behind the neighbouring forces, particularly the previous years. from those forces they were ahead of in However, if some forces had. gone ahead by obtaining substantial wage increases, it would not justify to engage in a process of leapfrogging. No doubt it is tempting to allow substantial wage increases to a group of employees whose salaries have fallen behind their counterparts in the neighbouring communities. However, an arbitrator in an interest dispute, in my opinion, is also a custodian of 'public interest' and, thus, has an obligation not to overlook the long range inflationary impact the substantial catch-up award may have on the economy and well-being of the people. We must learn from past experiences and should not allow history to repeat. Thestandards that may be applicable in times of prosperity or inflation might be of little value during depression. Thus, an arbitrator, while awarding wage increases, along with other factors, should give serious consideration to the wages paid by comparable police forces in other similar size

21 21 communities in the region. However, it may not be possible or desirable for an arbitrator to make a strict application of the criteria. Rather, they must be applied with the end in view of providing a solution that will be satisfactory enough to both sides to be workable. No single criterion is suitable for universal application under all circumstances. t requires the balancing of a number of criteria in an effort to achieve a result which falls somewhere within an equitable range, equitable in terms of those who must live under the result and those who pay for it. COMPARABLE FORCES n the instant case, the basic difficulty has been the parties' disagreement over the comparable forces, the forces which should or should not be included in a group of comparable forces, for the purposes of wage comparisons. The Association submitted that the police forces which are comparable to the Peterborough Police Force include: Brantford, Gloucester, Guelph, Kingston, Nepean, North Bay, Sarnia, Sault Ste. Marie. The Board, on the other hand, strongly opposed the inclusion of the forces of Nepean and Gloucester, on the ground of their close proximity to Ottawa, in the group of comparable forces. The Board, thus, excluded the forces of Nepean and Gloucester from its group of comparable forces, but added three new forces of Timmins, Cornwall and Barrie.

22 22 The forces of Timmins, Cornwall and Barrie, in my opinion, do not meet the criterion of similar size forces, which have the strength of 71, 80 and 82 officers respec tively vis-a-vis 107 in Peterborough. Further, the cities of North Bay, Timmins and Sault Ste. Marie fall rather in the northern region, economically and geographically. Thus, in my view, the forces that can truly be regarded as comparable and which meet the criteria of comparable police forces in similar size communities in the region are Kingston and Brantford. t may be noted that both the Association and the Board have included the forces of Kingston and Brantford among their comparable forces. Kingston is 180 km west and Brantford is 230 km east of Peterborough. Kingston has a population of 61,243 with a police force of 114 officers, whereas Brantford has a strength of 113 officers in the city of 75,465 people. Comparison of Kingston & Peterborough First Class Constable Salaries Kingston = 34,772 36,890 38,661 40,362 43,029 n/a Peterborough = 33,563 35,745 37,604 40,100 42,450? Difference ?

23 23 Comparison of Brantford & Peterborough First Class Constable Salaries Brantford = 33,859 35, ,160 42,168 45,592 Peterborough = 33,563 35,745 37,064 40,100 42,450? Difference ? n 1985, Peterborough's First Class Constable salary was $1209 less than that of Kingston. This gap was narrowed in 1988 to $262.00, but it increased to $578 in Whereas the salary of First Class Constable between the forces of Brantford and Peterborough, during the five year period, were apart within a narrow range of $300, except in the year of n 1985, Peterborough's salary was short by $296.00, but in 1988 it was more by $ However, in 1987, Peterborough lost some ground and its salary was $ less than ~hat of Brantford. n 1988, this gap was reduced substantially and their salaries were apart only by $ n 1989, Peterborough's salary was $42,450, which was $ more than that of Brantford. Conclusion Brantford's First Class Constable's aalary for the year 1990 is $45, was told that Brantford received a salary increase of 6% + 2% for Kingston has not yet settl~d, thus it cannot be said what salary increase will be received by the Kingston Force for The current

24 average salary increase for the police force in the province is 6.44 per cent. Thus, having regard to the presentations of the parties, taking into account the relevant factors, some of which have mentioned above, and for the foregoing reasons, my award is that salaries of the Peterborough.First Class Constables be increased by the following amounts: Effective from January 1, % (rounded) Effective from July 1, % (rounded). The above adjustments will result in the salary of a First Class Constable being adjusted Current Salary as follows: - $42, Effective from Janaury 1, $44, Effective from July 1, $45, This increase is consistent with many of the negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for the police officers in Ontario. retain the jurisdiction in the event of any dispute between the parties respecting the interpretation or imple mentation of this award. wish to thank the representatives of the parties, particularly Mr. Bruce Stewart Q.C. and Mr. Scott Kirkland, for their able pres0ntations, the courtesy and. assistance they have extended to me. Dated at Thunder Bay, Ontario, this 16th day of August, ~~ Arjun P. Aggarwal - Arbitrator