Print

Dean Review Consultation Questions

Written submission to Dean review

Submission number: DR-37

Name of organisation making submission: DR-37 Ontario College of Trades, Industrial Mechanic Millwright Trade Board

Responses to questions in submission form


Section A - The Public Interest in this Review

1. What do you understand by public interest?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


2. Who should the College serve? Who is “the public” in the public interest and what groups make up the public?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


3. How should the College make decisions in the public interest where different segments of the public may have opposing interests?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


4. Is the College currently protecting the public interest?

Yes. Directly in the compulsory trades and to a large extent in the voluntary trades by establishing curriculum and training standards


5. How should the College advance the public interest?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question





Section B - Issues Related to Scopes of Practice (SoPs)

6. What impact do SoPs in regulation have on your daily work activities or on the way you conduct business? What aspects of an SoP are important to the work of your trade? Please explain.

When SoPs are not clear (overlapping and/or ambiguous) much supervision and planning resources are wasted. An aspect of the IMM trade that is often overlooked or not appreciated is the "install" part. This includes rigging, piping, welding and fabrication.


7. Do you agree with the suggestion that trades may have core elements as well as peripheral elements?

Yes.


8. What should be the key elements of an SoP? In particular, should the SoP for a trade list all of the tasks, activities or functions in which an apprentice should be trained, only those that are unique to the trade, or only those that may pose a risk of harm to the public, tradespeople or other workers on the job? Please explain.

We believe the stated SoP for a particular trade should list both core and peripheral tasks. Only the core tasks, activities and functions that are unique to the trade (with priority placed on those that may pose a risk of harm to the public) should be enforceable. Peripheral tasks should also be identified and listed (along with a list of trades they are shared with) as these are required in developing appropriate curriculum's and training standards.


9. How should a review or change in SoP be carried out?

Through consultation with large numbers of stakeholders over a sufficient period of time (numbers of months are not enough)


10. Can or should the existing SoP provisions support the College’s diverse functions (e.g., apprenticeship training, enforcement, classification reviews)? Please explain.

The SoPs defines a trade and therefore no other activities within that trade should be contemplated until the SoPs have been identified, agreed upon and documented in a common format used by all trades. The SoPs is the cornerstone and guiding document for all else that follows - standards, curriculum, classification, enforcement etc.


11. Should the entire SoP for a compulsory trade be enforceable or be subject to enforcement? Please explain.

Only those tasks that put the public at an unacceptable level of risk should be enforceable.


12. Could the College benefit from a distinct list of compulsory activities that may pose a risk of harm to the public, tradespeople or other workers on the job? Please explain.

Yes. Such a list should be search-able by sector, trade and activity.


13. What is your understanding of what an overlap between SoPs is?

They are common tasks, activities and functions performed by more than one trade or group. They can occur between any two groups including compulsory trades, voluntary trades and groups of skilled or unskilled labourers.


14. Do overlaps between SoPs in regulation have an impact on your daily work or on the way you conduct business? Please explain.

Yes. It is often difficult to assign work when many aspects of scope are shared or overlapped, For example the IMM trade shares many tasks with other trades and skilled groups such as welders, machinists, steamfitter, construction millwright, riggers etc.


15. Does the application of the third legal interpretation principle on overlapping SoPs pose a risk of harm to the public, tradespeople, or other workers on the job? Please explain. If so, what can and should be done about it?

No





Section C - Classification or Reclassification of Trades as Compulsory or Voluntary

16. What makes a compulsory trade compulsory and what makes a voluntary trade voluntary?

A compulsory trade should be designated when performing tasks, activities and functions that would expose the population at large to an unacceptable level of risk if not carried out in a skilled and proper manner. Both construction and industrial mechanic/millwright deal with, on a regular basis, the installation, repair and commissioning of some very technical and possibly dangerous equipment. References are often made in the designation of "compulsory" that there is a danger to the public. It should be remembered that plant/production workers are also the public (in the minds of a skilled tradesperson), and improper installation or maintenance can certainly pose a hazard to them as well as the general public.


17. Is the current classification of trades as either compulsory or voluntary aligned with the College’s duty to serve and protect the public interest?

Yes


18. Is it reasonable to assume that there may be elements in the SoP for a trade that are inherently hazardous or that may pose a risk of harm to the public, tradespeople, or other workers on the job?

Yes


19. Could compulsory certification be limited to either the core elements of a trade or those tasks, activities, or functions that may pose a risk of harm to the public, tradespeople or other workers on the job? What kind of impact would these approaches have on your daily work or on the way you conduct business?

Yes. An example is that of welding. It is a trade as well as a skill included in many other trades. When that welding has the potential to put the public at a level of unacceptable risk it becomes enforceable via other legislation (CWB and TSSA)


20. Should the College continue to rely on an adjudicative review panel approach (i.e., the Ontario Labour Relations Board model) or should a different model be considered? Please explain.

We believe the current model does not work. There are not enough people involved in the discussion and decision making process and not enough time is allowed.


21. How should expert opinion be obtained?

The current model for stakeholder input should continue, however the following should be added: reviewers should be able (and expected to) research and solicit advice and input, other jurisdictions should be examined, SME's (Subject Matter Experts) should have a place on the panel and face to face consultation across the various parts of the province (small and large) should be an integral part of the process (in addition to any input solicited through electronic means)


22. Are the current criteria for trade classification reviews set out in O. Reg. 458/11 consistent with the public interest? Please explain.

The current criteria cover many of the areas that should be considered, however the emphasis should be on only those aspects that put people in harms way and should include room to discuss aspects that may not be included in the existin criterea


23. Are the criteria specific, clear and measurable enough to inform you of what data and evidence are needed to meet those criteria?

No. Much of what is required calls for anecdotal evidence and data that can only be estimated.


24. Are the existing criteria the right criteria?

No. The onus to prove a review is required should be on the party requesting it: whether it be the identification and classification of a trade, the re-classification of an existing trade or the de-classification of an existing trade. There should be an extensive process before being granted a review and the reasons for it should be obvious.





Section D - Decisions of the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB)

25. Do the scopes of practice (SoPs) in regulation reflect the way in which work is actually assigned in your trade or sector?

Yes


26. Do you agree with the notion that most jurisdictional disputes arise from peripheral elements of the trades? Please explain.

Yes but can also include some core tasks. See questions 14 and 19


27. What consideration should the College give, if any, to the decisions made by the OLRB in jurisdictional or work assignment disputes under the Labour Relations Act? If the College were to adopt the OLRB's decisions, what impact would that have on your trade and the way you conduct business? Please explain.

An OLRB decision could trigger an SoPs review with the College. As stated earlier in this document, the SoP is at the center of a trade and defines it, therefore College business could be seriously bogged down by adopting OLRB decisions.





Section E - General Response and Comments

28. Please provide additional comments below, if any.

Throughout this document we have used the terms acceptable or unacceptable risk. This is an important distinction as almost any imaginable task, activity or function has some level of risk and could become a slippery slope when considering classification and SoP issues We are adamant that the responsibility must be on the party requesting a classification review to prove it is warranted prior to it going ahead.