PLYWOOD WORKER By TONY VANDERHEIDE A vast majority of companies in the United States and Canada have no definite program for administering the wages paid to their workers. It is surprising to find that nations which have installed pro- duction systems, inspection systems, job simplification systems and extensive sales systems — which have enabled them to outproduce almost the entire world — have done so little research with regard to proper wage administration. One often finds that workers performing the same tasks are paid at widely differing wage rates, and that there are no obvious logical reasons for the existing relationships among the rates for ditterent jobs. However, increasing numbers of Unions and Companies are now turning to orderly and systematic methods of classifying jobs and determining job rates. The technique most frequently used to correct inequities in ex- isting wage structures is known as JOB EVALUATION, which is the complete operation of determining the value of an individual job in relation to the other jobs in a “unit.” It begins with a job analysis to obtain job descriptions, job specifications and includes the process of relating these by some system, which is designed to determine the relative value of the jobs within a “unit” or a series of comparable “units.” Job Evaluation as a technique to correct inequities in a wage structure is not sufficiently exact to be classified as “scientific,” but a properly developed job evaluation plan will establish an orderly THE WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER Exports in the field of Industrial Engineering regard the q “nonquantitive” system as valuable tools in job classification - these experts will readily point out that a “quantitive” system of ‘oh evaluation makes it possible to subject each job to a more thorou analysis and to divide all jobs into much finer classifications, The job evaluation plans presently in use within the jurisdi of the IWA — one plan for the plywood industry in Region K and another plan for the paper and insulite industry in Inte or Falls in Region IV — are known as Joint Union - Management Po Rating Factor Comparison Systems. ‘; In this system the characteristics of each job under study ar compared with a set of standards or definitions _and points awarded in proportion to the degree in which the job req , and conditions — measuring the overall worth of the job — present. This set of standards or definitions with related point values | contained in what is known as a “Job Evaluation Manual.” Al Union Attitudes Towards Job Evaluation © Union experience with job evaluation plans has varied and as a result there is no single and overall Union attitude or policy toward job evaluation. Some Unions have resisted the intre duction of job evaluation plans, while other Unions have and/or requested these plans. Where job evaluation plans are in effect the degree of U participation varies considerably. - Some Unions have allowed Management to exercise com and systematic basis for collective bargaining. There are a variety of job evaluation systems which are com- monly grouped as follows: 1. NONQUANTATIVE SYSTEM: (a) the ranking system (b) the job classification system 2. QUANTATIVE SYSTEMS: (c) the factor comparison system (d) the point system HISTORY OF JOB EVALUATION IN THE I.W.A. Job evaluation in the B.C. Coast plywood industry has . its origin in the 1955 contract negotiations, when the I.W.A. presented rate revision de- mands for some 68 categories in the plywood sector of the industry. During negotiations be- tween the Union and FIR. it was decided to explore the feasibility of setting rates for plywood workers according to a formal job evaluation plan and subsequently a covering memorandum of agreement was signed on June 22, 1955. Both parties proceeded to select their representative on the Joint Industry Job Evalu- ation Committee, which com- mittee undertook the study of some 1,000 categories in eleven plants. In the 1959 contract nego- tiations such subjects as wage curve, point range, grade in- crement, female rate, retro- activity, etc., had to be de- PICTURED ABOVE are the present representatives on the Joint Industry Job Evaluation Committee. Left, Mr. V. T. Scanlon of Forest Industrial Relations Ltd., and right, Brother A. P. Busch of Regional Council No. 1, IWA . This committee is to be commended for the speedy and efficient manner in which applicable adjustments — resulting from the 1966 Coast settlement—have been made available to Local Unions and companies concerned. control of such a plan, but have reserved the right to question — necessary — through the grievance procedure. Other Unions have decided to participate in such job evaluati plans on a joint basis, from the early stages of the plan’s design, selection of the-appropriate factors, the division of these factors in the appropriate levels or degrees, the descriptive factor and d language, the weighting of the factors and subsequent degrees an the establishment of Joint Union - Management Evaluation Team which. (a) jointly interview and observe (b) jointly write related job descriptions cided upon and — following a lengthy strike — a job eval- uation program became an in- tegral part of the Coast Mas- ter Agreement. The negotiated evaluation plan — technically known as a “point-rating plan” — was primarily based on the Na- tional Metal Trades Plan. Criticism has been voiced over the years that the Man- ual “adopted” under our plan had no bearing on the pre- vailing job requirements in the B.C. Plywood Industry. Valid or not, evaluation had been decided upon, a tailor- made plan for the plywood industry was not available, so the most suitable, available plan was selected. In April 1963 — outside of Industry negotiations — the ILW.A. and FIR. reached agreement on a change to the former pattern of 4 cents grade increments, which change resulted in additional monetary gains from 1 cent to 13 cents for plywood work- ers in Grade 7 and subse- quent grades, In 1964 the addition of new plants to the evaluation plan and changes to production methods resulting from mechanization in established plants made it necessary for both the Regional Council and FIR. to put another team of evaluators in the field _for improvements. in order to remain current with the increased demand on the Joint Industry Job Evalu- ation Committee. In line with Substitute Resolution R-18 passed at the 1965 Regional Convention, Regional President Jack Moore instructed the Region- al Evaluation Department to analyze the evaluation plan in order to arrive at suggestions The re- sulting suggestions were pre- sented to a conference of Lo- cal Union representatives and members of the plant review committees held at Wood- ‘ Administration and Wo k carried through the Regi Executive Board and Wages and Contract Conf ence into the 1966 contr negotiations. One of the me important decisions by th Regional Executive Boat pertaining to this subject w4 the retention of an Indust Engineer to assist the Negotiating Committee. The services of Mr. L. A, Fingg?- son have been instrumental in winning the importa gains for the IWA membé! Mr. Fingarson graduated f. the University of B.C. in 195 He worked for several years with the Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in Chalk River? Ontario, in Wage and Sale Study. He also worked for time with Stevenson & Kellogg Limited, Management Consu!?- ing Engineers. After operating his own business and actint as a freelance consultant for the past few years he recent! formed his own _ consul firm, Pacific North West trial Engineers. q L. A. FINGARSON