Canadian Labour Reporter

out to the deepwater construc- tion site. The Hebron Project employed security officers and marine traffic controllers at the GBS construc- tion site. Both positions were clas- sifications within the same bar- gaining unit. Security officers also worked at the location where flotilla work- ers embarked and disembarked. They monitored alarm systems, contacted the emergency re- sponse team, tracked the number of people onboard along with their hours, ensured those embarking and disembarking had the proper identification, and oversaw the verification process for workers who had worked a certain number of hours. In September 2014, the GBS started to be towed out to the deepwater construction site, a process that lasted until March 2015. During this time, four secu- rity officers — one per shift during the 24-hours-a-day work in the marine control room — worked in the marine traffic control room on the flotilla because safety man- agers were concerned the marine traffic controllers couldn't moni- tor alarms during the tow-out. These officers performed ad- ditional duties such as making announcements on the public address system, digital readouts, personnel movement and track- ing — duties that were usually per- formed by marine traffic control- lers before the tow-out began. Once the construction of the GBS structure and the tow-out were completed, the workforce decreased from 1,200 to about 850 people. As a result, the Hebron Project laid off the four security of- ficers from the marine control of- fice and assigned their work back to marine traffic controllers. Employer can't reassign tasks, claim lack of work: Union But the Hotel and Restaurant Workers' Union, Local 779 chal- lenged the layoffs, arguing there was no lack of work for the laid- off security officers as their duties had just been reassigned to ma- rine traffic controllers — duties for which the security officers had been hired. The union argued the Hebron Project created "a fiction of a shortage of work" but the laid-off security officers had separate and distinct tasks that didn't disappear and their positions weren't origi- nally intended to be temporary. The union also noted that the Hebron Project assigned the tasks of one classification to that of an- other. Both classifications — secu- rity officer and marine traffic con- troller — were in the same union but had different uniforms, train- ing, distinctions, qualifications, and responsibilities. As a result, the union argued the Hebron Project could not reassign the duties of one classification in the bargaining unit to another in order to lay off workers in the first classification. The Hebron Project claimed the security officers assigned to the marine control room were ad- ditional personnel added when the volume of work was increased during the increase in size of the flotilla and marine traffic during the tow-out. Once this stage was completed, the additional work was finished and the volume of work decreased with the number of workers — which dropped by almost one- third. The Hebron Project argued it was exercising its rights to man- age the enterprise and control its business. Collective agreement allowed for changes Arbitrator Dennis Browne found that the collective agreement pro- vided for the Hebron Project to "determine job content" and "hire, promote, demote and lay off be- cause of lack of work." The trade appendix to the col- lective agreement indicated the recruitment and selection of work- ers in security-related positions should be limited to individuals who were certified and bondable. Browne also found that there was nothing in the collective agreement that protected specific jobs or tasks performed by secu- rity officers. When the agreement was negotiated, the parties had the option of ensuring the specific work of the security officer clas- sification — such as monitoring alarms — could only be done by that classification and no other. However, they didn't do so and, as a result, there was no article supporting the union's argument that the Hebron Project couldn't reassign security officer tasks to marine traffic controllers, said the arbitrator. In addition, the collective agree- ment gave the Hebron Project freedom to direct the workforce, determine job content and lay off workers where there was lack of work — and there was less work available due to the drop in activ- ity on the project once the tow-out was completed. "Based on the evidence, the four security officers were hired at a time when marine traffic had in- creased due to the tow-out of the GBS and the resulting flotilla work which followed," said Browne. "Once this work was completed, the workforce and the marine traf- fic decreased. Consequently, the four security officers were laid off." Browne dismissed the griev- ance and upheld the Hebron Proj- ect's right to lay off the four secu- rity officers. 7 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2016 CANADIAN LABOUR REPORTER NEWS < Employer pg. 1 Agreement allowed employer to 'determine job content' Photo: China Stringer Network (Reuters) Arbitrator Dennis Browne ruled the parties' collective agreement gave the employer freedom to direct the workforce, determine job content and lay off workers where there was a lack of work.

• Cover