THE WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER ' collective bargaining. . t ; . - throu or being contemplated and this (d) jointly final point rate (e) jointly take complete charge of the Administration of the plan. (2) Whether a Union is for or against job evaluation it is absolutely necessary to provide adequate protection against any arbitrary and abusive application by Management when such‘a plan is in effect protection must be provided through Job Evaluation and Collective Bargaining It should be clearly understood that job evaluation does not determine the absolute value of a job in dollars and cents. This deter- _ mination is and should always remain a negotiable item between the Union and Management. Within the structure of the IWA, the Union and the Company— gh collective bargaining — have reached agreement upon: 1 (a) the type of plan (quantative versus non-quantative) (b) the applicable factors and their degrees (c) the applicable weighting of the factors and their degrees (d) the base rate (e) the point spread between the labor grades (f) the money spread or increment between labor grades (g) the jurisdiction of the joint evaluation teams (h) the proper contract language governing principles, pro- cedures and administration of the plan (i) the appeal procedure to be used when the members of the joint job evaluation become deadlocked (j) the training method for both the Union membership and Management. poe employed in plywood _ Operations. _Mr. Justice Nathan T. etz in his report to the “Minister of Labour dealt at considerable length with the “Subject of job evaluation and ler giving credit to both the ion and management for blishing job evaluation as a foundation for intelligent id rational consideration of » labo r-management problems recommended as follows: __(1)—The elimination of the 413 cents differential between (the male and female rates by bringing female rates up to the male rates as follows: An inerease of 7 cents per lour effective June 15, 1966. _ A further increase of 6 Gents per hour effective June _ @)—The introduction of a Factor 4 to be called Manual Dexterity as per the /88reement reached on June 9, 1966 which will increase os “ie se of Spreader crews. C parties were unable ) agree on the number of ints to be given to the four grees in this new Factor 4 ommend that it be fixed 5, 12 and 20, This will Oduce increases for these ups of from 4 cents to 10 nt | per hour effective im- diately. The re-weighing of eod evaluation pro- » removing a total of the knowledge a and placing * 6 mom in the plywood industry,” Some Answers to Membership Criticism on Job Evaluation (1) The present plans were not specifically designed to suit the in- dustry we are working in. ANSWER: It is true to say that the terminology in the descriptive language of the selected factors and their degrees is general rather than specific. As job evaluation proceeded, however, these points proportionately in the factor “Responsibility for Materials, Equipment and Products.” This will produce 4 cents to 5 cents per hour for a number of additional skilled categories. (It is to be noted that the additional wage increments contained in Items (1) for fe- male workers; (2) for Spreaders and Hot Press group and (3) for certain skilled workers as outlined above will affect over 40% of the workers in the plywood industry. In addition these categories will receive the general increase recommend- ed in Paragraph (1) headed General Wage Increase.) (4)—The granting by em- ployer of retroactive pay for new jobs as agreed on June 10, 1966. (5)—The introduction of administrative procedur- al changes which parties agreed upon in principle on June 10, 1966. (6)—The granting of the Union proposal to delete the words “foreman” and “dis- ciplinary authority” from