Forgot your password?


March 29, 2010

What you need to know if you should go off on Short Term Disability

Once you have called your team leader and advised him or her that you will be off for more than seven calendar days, your team leader will enter...


March 13, 2010

Mail Operations Organization - High Priority Message (March 12, 2010)

To: All Association of Postal Officials of Canada (APOC) Members

Dear Members,

As many of you are already aware, a message has been distributed...


March 12, 2010

APOC Job Evaluation Review Committee

Members of the Job Evaluation Review Committee have started meeting to review the classification appeals received from APOC-represented employees....


February 18, 2010



FEBRUARY 17, 2010

The Association received 13.6...


January 19, 2010

JEP Appeal Process Extended

The Appeal Process deadline is now extended to February 5, 2010.

Employees who wish to request an appeal of their job under the new Job Evaluation...


June 4, 2009

Communique about Jobs Evaluation

Dear Fellow Members,

Your bargaining team has received numerous emails from concerned

members about the Job Evaluation Plans and specifically the process

undertaken by the Canada Post Corporation and the Association of Postal

Officials of Canada to establish the Plans. We believe that an explanation

of the process is required so that all members are fully informed.

The first step in the creation of any job evaluation plan is the

establishment of what an employer wishes to value. An employer will then

determine which factors will be used to evaluate jobs. Each factor will have

degrees of intensity and each factor will be provided a weight. An employer

will then draft questions which are to be answered by employees

performing each job. The answers to the questions are then run through

the degrees and factors and based on the weighting a total number of

points are determined for each job.

In our case, the Corporation wanted the Plans to reflect its values and

priorities. The Corporation was of the opinion that jobs with subordinates

had to have a greater value and priority than jobs without subordinates.

And within the category of jobs with subordinates, those jobs in the plant

environment would be given greater value than those outside the plant

environment. The Corporationís rationale was that jobs with subordinates

in the plant environment have a greater impact on the Corporationís overall

success. This was a significant change from the Job Evaluation Plan for our

operations and enabler members from that which had existed since

approximately 1994.

The Corporation then established four criteria; skills, responsibility, effort

and working conditions which respects the principles of human rights and

pay equity legislation.

These criteria were then used to establish fourteen factors; product

knowledge, process knowledge, specialized knowledge, communication

skills, computer skills, financial resources, physical resources, supervision,

problem solving, effort, working conditions, hazards, work related stressors

and supervisory complexity. Each factor is defined by degrees of intensity of

each accountability and responsibility.

The Association took on a greater role when the parties drafted the

questionnaire and participated in the focus group sessions. Once the

questionnaires were completed, the parties then reviewed the information

provided by the answers given and agreed on the degree for each factor.

After, the Corporation ascribed degree to each factor and was run through

the software model created which provided a resulting point value for each

job. The jobs were then ranked by their corresponding point value.

Based on the values and priorities the Corporation considered significant, it

determined the weighting for each factor. For example, supervision was

given a weighting of 10% and supervisory complexity was given a

weighting of 20%. It is clear that the Corporation has provided significant

value to these factors given the weight afforded to them.

These results were then provided to the bargaining teams and the number

of classification levels and salary bands were negotiated. Each job was

then placed into their new classification level with the corresponding salary


Members who do not agree with the placement of their job within the new

classification shall be entitled to request a review of their job and the

classification to a Joint Review Committee.

It is extremely important to note that the new classification levels and

corresponding salary bands will have three results:

1.     Members whose current salaries are lower than the minimum of the

salary band that their job has been placed in shall have their salary

increased to the minimum of that band. Thereafter, they will be entitled to

the normal annual wage increases and annual pay progression, should

they qualify.

2.     Members whose current salaries fall above the minimum and below

the maximum of the salary band which their job has been placed in shall be

placed into that band without any adjustment. Thereafter, they will be

entitled to the normal annual wage increases and annual pay progression,

should they qualify.

3.     Members whose current salaries are above the maximum of the salary

band which their job has been placed in shall not suffer any loss of salary.

They shall be afforded salary protection and receive pensionable lump sum

payments equal to the wage increases negotiated in the collective

agreement for a yet to be determined time period.

We hope the above information clarifies and answers many of the

questions members have with regards to the New Job Evaluation Plans.

We encourage all members to continue to visit the APOC website for further

updates as we seek to finalize a collective agreement.

Previous  Next

Serving you at the York branch

2750 14th Avenue Unit G14, Unionville, On, L3R 0B6

google apocyork

Phone 905-479-5950

Fax 905-479-4290