Print

Dean Review Consultation Questions

Written submission to Dean review

Submission number: DR-61

Name of organisation making submission: DR-61 Collision Industry Information Assistance

Responses to questions in submission form


Section A - The Public Interest in this Review

1. What do you understand by public interest?

Public interest might be better described as public safety. Is the work of the College and trade work done by licensed technicians, stabilizing, enhancing or providing a framework to better protect the public ? Enforcement activity by the College could also be considered as public protection, by ensuring non-qualified persons are unable to work on vehicles because the consumer (public) might be endangered.


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

A broad-minded approach by the College to take actions that consider the long-term well-being of a citizen in Ontario would be at the same time beneficial to trades groups. For instance, in vehicle collision repair, although more accidents would mean more business and some might think should then be encouraged or welcomed, the public interest is that a lower number of collisions and their related injuries, should be the goal. Public interest should always be the victor in these discussions- the vast majority of times the industry is also ahead. No one would propose a policy or action that benefits a trades group, but hurts the consumers that the trades group serves.


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

Not sure how that can occur. Groups might have different or overlapping SOPs for instance, but all groups would understand if all decisions were filtered on the basis of public protection not just public interest.


4. Is the College currently protecting the public interest?

Enforcement activity against unqualified or unlicensed workers is a positive way of protecting public interest and safety.


5. How should the College advance the public interest?

The number of enforcement staff was targetted to be three times the current level by now and needs to be boosted.





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.

The vast majority of technicians and apprentices in our industry have no idea that SOPs for their trade even exist. They just work in areas that they have been taught. SOPs become valuable for an enforcement officer in determining level of non-compliance and the seriousness of what enforcement action might be considered, however current SOPs are so outdated in terms of our industry that they do not reflect current work practices. SOPs simply outline what is the minimum level of retricted skills that only that trade is allowed to do. They definitely need updating


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

Yes. SOPs should contain core or restricted elements. Those activities that are shared with other trades can be included but would need to be restricted in both trades.


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.

Only those that are unique to a restricted trade should be the key elements. However, in our trade, diagnosing of vehicle damage is not currently in the SOPs, yet should be. This is a safety related issue that may put damaged cars back on the road improperly repaired. So consideration to adding an item into the SOPs like diagnosis of damage should take into effect the road safety and public protection considerations. In our view, diagnosis of the damage is critical and safety-oriented and should be both be in the restricted elements of the trade and in the SOPs.


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

First should be a submission by the Trade Board for that trade. Next should be a consideration of whether the change of an SOP reflects a safety or road use improvement to all in the industry and public. Third would be a consideration of the evolution of the trade and complexity or technological advancement in the trade to make this new SOP reasonable, For instance if plastic and seal adhesive and special welding (aluminum) are now the normal and meet the other review standards then that needs to be considered for addition. Some of the current SOPs have not actually been done in over 20 years in the field. Most of the SOP addition recommendations will meet public safety and protection considerations as well as benefiting the trade. Complaints would be expected from those that have taken advantage of obsolete SOPs and have modelled a business opportunity based on that gap. These complaints should be looked at cautiously. Just because you might be employed n a specific occupation that puts the public at risk is not a reason to let that risk continue if it can be stopped with a change in the SOPs. Public notification is fair and reasonable. Since this is a regulation, a final complaint can be delivered to Cabinet should that be required. For instance, if diagnosing vehicle damage is taken as a restricted SOP, possibly those that make a living without proper qualification and provide that service now may not be thrilled. Please look at that small group with an eye to them helping themselves by recommending a new trade they may eventually be able to encompass that function in concert with the College of Trades.


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

Certainly enforcement officers would know when charges or tickets can be issued based on SOPs that are consistent with modern repairs and easier to understand.


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

Yes. If this SOP is the minimum agreed consistent and restricted activity, then that is the only ones that can be and should be enforced. As noted, the SOPs would have to be updated soon before reasonable enforcement measures can be taken.


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.

It would not be unreasonable to phrase the SOP activities in terms of public safety. Public safety and protection should be the lead in determining future SOP activities.


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

In the collision repair trade, suspension removal and re-installation can be done by a collision repairer (in the event of collision damage ) and also by an Automotive Service Technician (for servicing), hence the two SOPs would overlap a trade. Both trades are reasonable for the work they do (and the servicing versus replacement argument has been an accepted practice for years) but both should also be restricted. Someone from off the street in their backyard or worse should not have the right under legislation to do this work if public safety is involved (and it is). It should be restricted to just those trades that have that activity in their SOPs.


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

Generally no, however in new car dealerships there is always that battle between service and collision over who actually can perform the electronic, airbag and suspension work. It also confuses the enforcement officers. Clear and defined SOPs that match modern procedural and more technologically advanced repair work would be beneficial.


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?

I can't see any harm if an SOP existed in two or more trades and was still restricted. For instance it would allow a motor vehicle tech and a collision damage tech to both repair vehicle suspensions for instance. Electronic or security diagnosis (not collision damage estimating) could be handled by both trades with equal skill. Allowing anyone from just "off the street" to do this work would raise the challenge of public safety.





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?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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.

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


21. How should expert opinion be obtained?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


24. Are the existing criteria the right criteria?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question





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?

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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

Respondent did not provide a response to this question


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.

Respondent did not provide a response to this question





Section E - General Response and Comments

28. Please provide additional comments below, if any.

Respondent did not provide a response to this question