by Contract Number (PDF) - OCSEA
by Contract Number (PDF) - OCSEA
by Contract Number (PDF) - OCSEA
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
one’s previous conduct, it would be unfair or<br />
unjust to make the statement). 92<br />
Being “on call” is not necessarily the same as<br />
being on stand-<strong>by</strong>. Whereas employees are not<br />
required to be near a telephone when “on call,”<br />
they are so required when on stand-<strong>by</strong> under<br />
ODOT procedures. The arbitrator did not decide<br />
whether “on call” employees are entitled to<br />
stand-<strong>by</strong> pay since that was not at issue in the<br />
grievance. 92<br />
The distinction between being on stand-<strong>by</strong> and<br />
being on call is that an employee on stand-<strong>by</strong> is<br />
required to keep himself available for work. An<br />
employee who is “on call” is not required to<br />
respond when contacted <strong>by</strong> beeper, nor is he<br />
required to accept the work. In differentiating the<br />
two statuses the important questions are (1) is<br />
employee free to use his time for his own benefit<br />
and (2) are the call backs so frequent that<br />
employee is not really free to us the time for his<br />
own benefit. 100<br />
The status of the EPA’s On Scene Coordinator<br />
does not depend on whether one calls it on-call<br />
or stand<strong>by</strong>, but on whether he or she is required<br />
<strong>by</strong> the agency…to be available for possible call<br />
to work, under Article 13,12 of the contract. “oncall”<br />
as used for the On-scene Coordinators<br />
means “stand-<strong>by</strong>” within the meaning of Article<br />
13.12. 464 (1992-94 contract)<br />
Employees who are restricted in their physical<br />
location and personal condition or whose time is<br />
so interrupted <strong>by</strong> employer calls that they are not<br />
free to use the time effectively for their own<br />
purposes, and who are informed that they are<br />
required to be available, are working. 464<br />
(1992-94 contract)<br />
The grievant’s vacancy posting, position<br />
description, and class specifications state<br />
continuous on-call status as a job duty. It is clear<br />
that the grievant had no option but to be on call<br />
and respond to calls. 464 (1992-94 contract)<br />
13.13 – Flextime/Four Day Work Week<br />
13.14 – Shift Rotation, Swing Shifts, Split<br />
Shifts<br />
The arbitrator determined that there was never a<br />
requirement of readiness conveyed to the<br />
grievants. This was supported <strong>by</strong> the fact that in<br />
at least thirteen years, the employer had never<br />
disciplined anyone for failing to respond. They<br />
were not required to stay at a specific location or<br />
within close proximity to work tools. The<br />
arbitrator noted that although the grievants did<br />
alter their lifestyles somewhat to accommodate<br />
their employer’s needs, they were largely free to<br />
live their lives as they chose. 831<br />
13.15 – Emergency Leave<br />
Section 13.15 of the agreement gives the<br />
authority to declare a snow emergency to the<br />
employer, but does not specify that the Director<br />
of Highway Safety is the sole and exclusive<br />
authority to issue declarations of emergency. The<br />
Deputy Director of ODOT District5, called the<br />
situation an emergency when asking District 5<br />
employees to report to work and work overtime<br />
to the limits of their capabilities. It is reasonable<br />
for the employees to believe that he had the<br />
proper authority to do so and they are entitled to<br />
rely upon his representations in such<br />
circumstances. The case is the same for those<br />
employees who had previously received a letter<br />
stating that they were to report to work when the<br />
Director of Highway Safety declared an<br />
emergency. Those employees are not to be<br />
expected to ask the Deputy Director if he is<br />
acting upon the authority of the Director of<br />
Highway Safety before responding to the call.<br />
275<br />
The agreement gives the authority to declare an<br />
emergency to the employer. Since, under the<br />
contract, an emergency is considered to exist<br />
when the employer declares it so, the arbitrator is<br />
not permitted to second guess the employer as to<br />
whether an emergency existed. 275<br />
Section 13.15 indicated that an emergency does<br />
not exist if the situation is normal or reasonably<br />
foreseeable at the work site. Fourteen inches of<br />
snow in April in south central Ohio is not<br />
reasonably foreseeable. 275<br />
In the arbitrator’s interpretation of Section 13.15<br />
of the Agreement the work “emergency” was<br />
defined. First, an emergency is not limited to<br />
weather conditions. The arbitrator used the<br />
following analysis:<br />
1. Is the event (a prison escape) “normal or<br />
reasonably foreseeable to the place or<br />
employment and/or position description of the<br />
employee?” An escape is a situation reasonably<br />
foreseeable under the position description of a<br />
Correctional Officer.