Benefits seminars not considered ‘professional development’ for staff

Chinese cooking, archery not job-related courses: Employer

After a union at a school district in Parksville, B.C., used funds to sponsor pension and benefits talks for teachers on a professional-development day, the board filed a grievance against the union.

On Oct. 21, 2016, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), Local 3570 held seminars on the employee’s pension plan. On Feb. 24, 2017, the union held another seminar on the district’s benefits plan.

The Board of Education of School District No. 69 (Qualicum) grieved the union’s actions and argued the talks were intended to “promote and foster the professional development of staff” and the benefits and pension talks violated article 37.2 of the collective agreement, because they were not “directly related to the skills and qualifications necessary to the various job descriptions.”

But the union argued that it was a longstanding practice that had not been grieved before, and the employer should be estopped from denying the funds for the seminars until the next round of bargaining for the collective agreement.

The agreement mandated that each employee contributed $7 per year, while the employer contributed $21 per employee per year to a professional development fund.

“The board and the union agree that professional-development activities covered by this article are intended to promote and foster the professional development of staff,” read article 37.2 of the collective agreement. 

From 2002, the union held six similar seminars on the pension plan, testified Troy Forster, CUPE, Local 3570 president, and they were not disputed by the district.

As well, a 2012 seminar was held on the topic of joint early intervention services, which was a topic relating to benefits, said Forster.

However, as early as 2010, the district expressed concerns during labour-management meetings that seminars “may not be job-related,” said JoAnne Shepherd, director of human resources.

On Nov. 19, 2010, Bernice Hannan, secretary treasurer, wrote a letter to Lisa Paine, union president clarifying the district’s position. 

“This letter shall serve as notice that future seminars offered on professional development days must be directly related to the skills and qualifications necessary for the various job descriptions,” read the letter.

But on Nov. 8, 2011, during another labour-management meeting, CUPE agreed to “continue to attempt to present sessions that are directly related to the skills and qualifications necessary to the various job descriptions,” according to the minutes.

On April 12, 2016, the union said it was upset that the district had denied eight of the 15 seminars proposed. The district responded that Chinese cooking and archery (two of those denied), for example, were not related to employee’s jobs.

In the grievance, the district asked for repayment of salaries for 62 employees who attended the October pension talks and for 149 employees who attended the February benefits talks. 

As well, the district asked for repayment of its employer contributions for both seminars. 

Arbitrator Marguerite Jackson (backed by fellow board members Alissa Perry and Ian McLean) upheld the grievance but it ordered only a portion of the employer’s contributions be repaid by CUPE.

“Seminars arranged by the union must precisely address topics that give the employees specific education, training or capability essential to the performance of their various jobs. If the seminars fail in this regard, the failure constitutes a violation by the union of articles 37.2 and 37.3. Such is the case here with respect to the pension and benefits plans seminars offered in October 2016 and February 2017.”

The union’s argument that the district didn’t grieve the practice in the past was rejected. “The employer did raise the issue of seminars that did not meet the Article 37.3 criteria in bargaining in April 2013,” said Jackson. 

Reference: Board of Education of School District No. 69 (Qualicum) and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3570. Marguerite Jackson — arbitrator. Ilan Burkes for the employer. Kirk Oates for the employee. April 20, 2018. 2018 CarswellBC 1318

Latest stories