State Bar of Wisconsin Return to wisbar.org Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission Awards

Download this document in Adobe PDF

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR
In the Matter of the Arbitration

of a Dispute Between

KENOSHA COUNTY

and

KENOSHA COUNTY LOCAL 990, AFSCME, AFL-CIO -- COURTHOUSE AND SOCIAL SERVICES CLERICAL

Case 149

No. 52559

MA-9021

Reclassification grievances

Jeanine Belhumeur -#95-990C-001

Judy Matrise - #95-990C-007

Appearances:

Mr. Frank Volpintesta, Corporation Counsel, c/o Kenosha County Courthouse, 912 - 56th Street, Kenosha, WI 53142, appearing on behalf of the County.

Mr. John Maglio, Staff Representative, Wisconsin Council 40, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, P.O. Box 624, Racine, WI 53401-0624, appearing on behalf of the Union.

ARBITRATION AWARD

At the joint request of the Union and County noted above, the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission designated the undersigned Marshall L. Gratz as Arbitrator to hear and decide a dispute concerning the County's denial of seven reclassifications, including the two noted above, which dispute arose under the parties' 1993-95 Agreement (Agreement).

Following settlement discussions on August 16, 1995, the grievances of all but the two Grievants noted above were resolved. A hearing was conducted concerning those two disputed positions at the County Personnel Department office on October 12, 1995. The proceedings were not transcribed, however, the parties agreed that the Arbitrator could maintain a cassette tape recording of the testimony and arguments for the Arbitrator's exclusive use in award preparation.

The parties summed up orally at the conclusion of the hearing, marking the close of the hearing.

STIPULATED ISSUES

At the hearing, the parties authorized the Arbitrator to decide the following issues:

1. Is the County violating the Agreement by improperly classifying Jeanine Belhumeur? If so, what is the appropriate remedy?

2. Is the County violating the Agreement by improperly classifying Judy Matrise? If so, what is the appropriate remedy?

PORTIONS OF THE AGREEMENT

ARTICLE VII - JOB POSTING

. . .

Section 7.10 Reclassification Applications. The practice of reclassification applications and review (including grievance) upon successfully completing the state certificate criteria, shall be continued for income maintenance employees. However, the parties agree to enter into negotiations during the life of the Agreement, up to and including arbitration under section 111.70 of the Wisconsin Statutes, over the issue of classification.

. . .

ARTICLE VIII - WAGES

Section 8.5. Higher Rated Job Transfer. An employee assigned to a higher rated job for the majority of a shift shall receive the higher rated pay.

Section 8.6. Higher Rated Job - Bidding. Employees going to a higher rated job through a job posting or reclassification shall be placed on the schedule at the wage closest to, but higher than, the position being vacated, but in no event shall they be paid less than received on the position being vacated. They shall remain at that rate until the completion of the probationary period as defined in Section 7.5. Following completion of the probationary period, they shall be placed at the step in the rate range to which their seniority entitles them.

Section 8.7. The Union will be notified in writing by the County's Labor Relations and Personnel Department when reclassification requests are initiated by either employees or department heads.

. . .

BACKGROUND

The Union represents the clerical employes in the County's Courthouse and Department of Social Services. The County and Union have been parties to a series of collective bargaining agreements covering that unit, including the Agreement.

The grievances giving rise to this proceeding involve two Clerk Typist I's: Jeanine Belhumeur, who works in the Circuit Court Clerk's office and who was initially hired by the County in 1987 and who became a regular Clerk Typist I on or about September 6, 1993; and Judy Matrise, who works in the District Attorney's office and who has been a County employe since March of 1985.

Each grievance asserts the following:

(List applicable violation) Denial of reclassification to Clerk Typist II. I am and have been performing Clerk Typist II duties as indicated in the Reclassification Study completed by the Personnel Department. This reclassification is supported by my immediate supervisor and the department head. Denying reclassification is in violation of Labor Management Agreement, Article VII, Sect. 7.10; Article VIII, Sect. 8.5; and any other sections that may apply.

Adjustment required: That I be reclassified as a Clerk Typist II as defined in the Clerk Typist II qualifications, effective as of October 1, 1994 [for Belhumeur and as of January 1, 1995 for Matrise.]

The position descriptions for Clerk Typist I and II are attached. The June 30, 1995 hourly wage rates for Clerk Typist I range from a start rate of $10.71 to an after 42 months rate of $13.40, with three intervening step increases after 12, 24 and 36 months of service. The comparable rates for Clerk Typist II are $11.27 and $14.09.

At the hearing the Union presented testimony by each of the Grievants, by Deputy District Attorney Glenn Blise and by Clerk of Circuit Court Gail Gentz. The County responded with testimony by James Bilotti of the County Personnel Department.

Additional background information is set forth in the summaries of the parties' positions and in the discussion, below.

POSITION OF THE UNION

The Grievants are both long service County employes who hold the only two remaining Clerk-Typist I positions in the bargaining unit, which are the two lowest paid positions in the unit. In each case, the department head and immediate supervisor has confirmed that the employe involved has the skill and ability and performs the duties required of a Clerk Typist II.

The fact that both Grievants perform receptionist duties does not disqualify them from Clerk Typist II status. The Clerk Typist II description includes the same reference to that type of work as the Clerk Typist I description contains. Moreover, the County has posted Clerk Typist II vacancies that specify that receptionist work is among the duties of the posted position. Grievant Belhumeur's testimony shows that she performs duties that correlate closely with those in the Clerk Typist II description. Various aspects of her work are complex and require independent judgment. Her duties have changed significantly over a reasonably short time. It is unrefuted that she types at a 55-60 words per minute rate and that she tested at or above the 55 words per minute level in connection with a recent bid for another County position.

Gentz' testimony also establishes that Belhumeur's position measures up to the Clerk Typist II level. Gentz testified that Grievant Belhumeur is the only Clerk Typist I left in the Circuit Court Clerk's office; that her work is performed independently and in various respects requires the exercise of discretion and significant skill. Two clerical employes in that office rated above Clerk Typist I also perform telephone work. In addition to telephone work, Belhumeur is responsible for handling a growing small claims caseload, setting court dates, notarizing documents and opening and sorting mail. Belhumeur's work sometimes involves the pressure of dealing with angry or demanding members of the public. The office has cross-trained its clerical employes so that Belhumeur often backs up Clerk Typist II's. Thus, in various respects, her job goes well beyond answering the phone and greeting the public.

Bilotti's conclusions that too little of Grievant's work is at the Clerk Typist II level ought not be considered persuasive. He observed Grievant Belhumeur for only a half hour, which did not constitute a representative sampling of her work. Bilotti pressed to get something entered on his form, rather than making a deliberate and reliable review of her duties and responsibilities.

Turning to Grievant Matrise, the evidence shows she is the only remaining Clerk Typist I in the District Attorney's office. She described the nature of her work and the independence she has in performing those duties. While she is the main person responsible for answering the phone in that office, she also does other important work as well. She is not sitting and waiting for the phone to ring. She backs up other, higher rated clerical employes in the office. She prepares writs; deals quite independently with the Sheriff's department concerning execution of the writs she prepares; prepares wage claims; schedules court appearances; and negotiates with prisons to arrange releases of Kenosha County detainees.

All of the other clerical employes in the DA's office are at the Clerk Typist II level or above. Yet, each of them is assigned to just one court branch, whereas Grievant Matrise is effectively assigned to all branches because she must be thoroughly familiar with all of the DA's office's activities in all of the branches.

Grievant Matrise uses discretion in disseminating file materials in the discovery process. In that regard, the propriety of releasing some documents is routine, but others may or may not be releasable depending on the factors such as age, criminal record and germaneness of the document or form requested.

Both the volume of Matrise's work and the level of responsibility it involves have been shown to have increased over time. She estimated that, while also fulfilling her ongoing telephone and counter responsibilities, she spends a portion of the remainder of two days a week on writs, works on warrants at various times throughout each day, and works sporadically on wage claims.

While it is true that Matrise has not agreed to take a test that would demonstrate whether she currently types at a net 55 word per minute rate, it has not been shown that a possible lack of that qualification has hindered her in the performance of her job. Her supervisors' opinions of her work suggest just the opposite, and she has not been criticized for a lack of speed in producing the documents she types.

Blise testified that the DA's office has been reorganized and that as a result Matrise has taken on some work previously performed by Clerk Typist II's and some work previously performed by attorneys in the office. Blise' testimony confirmed that Matrise exercises independent judgment regularly; coordinates witness scheduling; requires knowledge of all phases of the work of the DA's office; and prepares warrants and writs. Blise also testified that Matrise coordinates prisoner pick-ups by the Sheriff's department; negotiates concerning related arrangements with various prisons; and does so on her own without close supervision. She also prepares wage claim documents, schedules court appearances and variously backs up Clerk Typist II's in their absence.

Bilotti's conclusions that too little of Matrise's work is at the Clerk Typist II level ought not be persuasive because he only spent half an hour observing Matrise on the job such that he did not observe a representative sampling of her work. In addition, as Matrise testified, the percentages that Bilotti entered on his documentation are not accurate or reliable because constant interruptions of any one task by the need to perform another prevented Matrise from providing a meaningful percentage breakdown. DA Office Manager Joyce Swift, who knows the job much better than Bilotti, joined Blise and the District Attorney in concluding in their letter to Personnel Director Brooke Koons that, based on their office's own study of the duties performed by what had been the four Clerk Typist Is in that office, all four had the same degree of responsibility and were working at the level of a Clerk Typist II.

Accordingly, the Arbitrator should order the County to grant the requested reclassifications effective on the date of initiation of the respective grievances, February 28, 1995 (Belhumeur) and March 2, 1995 (Matrise).

POSITION OF THE EMPLOYER

The proper focus in these cases is not on whether the employes involved are good employes nor is it on whether they have a heavy or moderate volume of work to perform. Rather, the question is whether the nature and type of work performed constitutes Clerk Typist II rather than Clerk Typist I work.

The fact that no other positions are classified at the Clerk Typist I level does not establish that the positions at issue cannot be Clerk Typist I's. Otherwise, the Clerk-Typist I classification and rates would be rendered empty and meaningless. The instant positions have been classified at the Clerk Typist I level for many years without grievances being filed, and the jobs have not changed in ways that justify the higher Clerk Typist II rates.

The County has a need in these work locations for a bundle of duties consisting primarily of basic reception duties with some other basic clerical functions added. Bilotti found that Belhumeur spent 40 percent of her time performing receptionist duties on the phone and at the counter and that Matrise spent 60 percent of her time on those basic functions. The work performed by the Grievants is important, but it is not complex. It does not involve a high degree of independent judgment.

The County's Personnel Department studied these jobs in the same way it studied various others: sending out, receiving and reviewing questionnaires; reviewing the Clerk Typist I and II job descriptions; observing the employe performing the work; discussing the job with the incumbent and with relevant supervisors; and determining the proper classification for the position on those bases. In several other cases the County concluded that the requests for reclassification had merit, and those were granted. In these two remaining cases Bilotti determined that there clearly was not merit to their claims to be working at the II level.

The Clerk Typist I description depicts an entry level bargaining unit Clerk Typist classification. While that description overlaps in many respects with the Clerk Typist II description, and while both include receptionist duties, the high percentage of the Grievants' time spent on receptionist duties strongly supports the conclusion that theirs are Clerk Typist I positions.

The Union overstates the complexity of the jobs at issue. Besides the basic receptionist duties, most of the work involves rote, routine form work and routine retrieval of computer data, which does not support Clerk Typist II status.

The Union also greatly exaggerates the independent judgment that the Grievants' work requires of them. The Grievants apply well-established laws, regulations and practices or they have other higher-rated personnel available to check with. The Union's claim that Matrise exercises significant judgment regarding what file materials she releases in response to defense attorney discovery overstates Matrise' role. Matrise in those instances is following established office policies and practices about which categories of documents are to be released and which are not and she can check with attorneys in the office if she is uncertain about what category a particular document falls into.

The fact that the department heads and supervisors have sought and supported the disputed reclassifications is not particularly significant. Supervisors often support such requests to keep peace in their offices. It is the County's Personnel Department, not line supervisors, who have the responsibility and the expertise to conduct classification studies and to distinguish between Clerk Typist I and II level positions. The "extensive study" supposedly conducted by the DA's office turns out to have involved no systematic gathering of information via questionnaire and, indeed, no documentation of any kind.

The Union is in a poor position to claim that Bilotti reported inaccurate percentages of time spent by Matrise because Matrise did not provide Bilotti with any percentages at all. While estimating such percentages is often a difficult task, it is a critically important one in properly classifying a position, and Grievant Matrise's failure to provide Bilotti any such figures of her own further undercuts her claim to Clerk Typist II status. In any event, Blise estimated that Grievant Matrise handles some 400 calls a day. By any standard that makes her job predominantly involved in basic telephone and receptionist work.

It is also significant that, unlike all of the employes whose reclassifications to Clerk Typist II the County has granted, Grievant Matrise has never succeeded (in the past 12 months or indeed at any time) in typing on a timed test at the net 55 words per minute qualifying level specified in the Clerk Typist II description. In fact, she declined to take that test when the County offered it to her during the pendency of the grievance. To grant her reclassification request in this case would improperly allow her to obtain a position for which she would not qualify in a competitive posting situation.

For those reasons, neither of the two reclassification requests at issue should be granted.

DISCUSSION

Upon consideration of the portions of the Agreement set forth above and of the parties' mutual expectations as reflected in their respective arguments, the Arbitrator concludes that what is relevant and controlling in cases of this kind is a comparison of the incumbents' duties and responsibilities with the duties and responsibilities that distinguish the Clerk Typist II classification from Clerk Typist I. See e.g., Wilson Jones Co., 51 LA 35, 37 (Daugherty, 1968) (". . . the critical questions are (a) What are the key or core elements of the jobs involved which distinguish one job from the other(s) and justify the wage rate differentials between (among) them agreed to by the parties, and (b) did the aggrieved employe(s) perform actual work that "invaded" said core elements? . . . In many such cases there are substantial areas of overlap in the operations specified for two or more jobs. That is, an employee in one job is authorized to do some of the work that another employee in another classification is also permitted to do. But in such case an employee in one job cannot properly be said to have taken over the work in another job until and unless he has been required to perform the operations that . . . are key and relatively exclusive to the latter classification.") The Union bears the burden of persuasion in a case of this kind.

The outcome of this case is controlled neither by the fact that granting the instant reclassifications would eliminate the remaining Clerk Typist I's in the bargaining unit nor by the fact that denying one or both would assure that at least one position continues to exist in that classification. The parties' inclusion in the Agreement of a rate for the duties described in the Clerk Typist I description does not constitute mutual agreement that one or more positions within that classification will always be maintained.

Nor is it controlling that the instant positions have, for years, been classified at the Clerk Typist I level without a grievance being filed. If the nature of the work of those positions has evolved so as to justify reclassification, the lower historical classification of the position is not a basis on which to deny the instant requests.

The undisputed quality of the incumbents' performance is not the issue in this case, either, and the volume of the work they perform is relevant only to the extent that it sheds light on the nature and type of work required of the incumbents and/or on the nature and extent of supervision of that work.

The Arbitrator finds it appropriate to consider the opinions of the Personnel Department's analyst and of the line supervisors involved, along with the evidence concerning the bases upon which those opinions were offered. However, it is the Arbitrator who is responsible for making the critical comparison described above based on all of the evidence presented at the arbitration hearing.

When the "Essential Job Functions" listed for the Clerk Typist I and II are compared and the overlapping duties eliminated, the remaining functions characteristic only of the Clerk Typist II classification -- along with the Arbitrator's summary characterization of the nature and extent of the incumbents' performance of each (in brackets) -- are as follows:

Compiles data and prepares and submits a variety of statistical reports and records for assigned program area; [neither does this to any significant extent]

Coordinates and pays bills as instructed, prepares, submits, and files invoices and payment authorizations; [neither does this to any significant extent]

Checks computer printouts, corrects errors, edits and files; [neither does this to any significant extent]

Composes letters from general instructions; [both do this, but limited to one page letters and forms]

Schedules hearings, makes appointments, and keeps calendars; [both do this or its equivalent]

Checks documents before recording to assure completeness and accuracy; [both do this or its equivalent]

Maintains clerical and bookkeeping records and prepares reports; [both keep some records but prepare few, if any, reports]

Attends meetings, takes and transcribes minutes as required; [neither does this]

That analysis indicates that the Grievants perform some but not all of the listed functions that differentiate the Clerk Typist I and II classifications. The evidence indicates that the same can be said of at least some of the other bargaining unit employes classified as Clerk Typist IIs.

The "distinguishing features" set forth in the two job descriptions differ as follows:

Clerk Typist I -- "This is clerical work requiring basic office skills including typing, coding, filing and operation of various office machines. Work is characteristically repetitive and performed according to established practices and procedures. Immediate or regulated supervision is always available."

Clerk Typist II -- "This is responsible clerical work requiring complete familiarity with the assigned office or program. The employee must exercise judgment in the application of procedures and regulations to routine matters. Duties include typing, computer terminal operation, basic clerical account keeping, preparation of correspondence and record-keeping. Work may be performed under directed supervision depending on the nature of the assignment. Work in this class differs from that of Clerk Typist I in that it allows limited independence of action and requires a correspondingly higher degree of accuracy."

When the differences between the classifications' distinguishing features are analyzed, the Arbitrator finds some considerations that tend to support the Grievants' reclassification requests and some that tend to support the County's position.

Both positions have evolved such that complete familiarity with the assigned office or program has become necessary. On the other hand, both positions deal with what the County aptly identifies as routine matters. Both positions have been shown to require the exercise of judgment in the application of some procedures, regulations and office policies with regard to those routine matters, but there are other activities where the judgments required of the Grievants essentially involve rote applications of well-established practices and procedures. Both engage in what can fairly be described as preparation of correspondence and basic record-keeping, in addition to basic typing, coding, filing and office machine operation, but neither does any basic clerical account keeping.

The supervision provided to the incumbents appears far more limited than the "immediate or regulated supervision [that] is always available" for Clerk Typist I's. It is more aptly described as the "directed supervision depending on the nature of the assignment" that characterizes Clerk Typist II's. However, the Arbitrator cannot be certain from the instant record whether it is the Grievants' long service and thorough familiarity with their jobs that reduces the extent to which they are supervised or the level of responsibility inherent in their assigned duties. The evidence does suggest that if the Grievants are uncertain on how to handle particular matters, higher-rated personnel are available to them with whom they can confer to get their uncertainties resolved; however, the sheer volume of their work makes frequent base-touching of that kind impractical.

The record establishes that the Grievants have a limited degree of independence of action with respect to how they perform certain aspects of their work. The accuracy of the information they provide to the public and of the documents they review, file, prepare and/or process directly affects the quality of the County functions involved in the Grievants' activities, because in various respects the County is without protection from possible adverse consequences due to errors that the Grievants might make. On the other hand, the Grievants do not gather data into reports or prepare lengthy, complex or detailed correspondence, so their positions do not demand the kind of accuracy required to perform tasks of those kinds.

While the incumbents both spend a substantial amount of time answering and transferring incoming telephone calls and interfacing with people at the office counter, receptionist duty is common to both the Clerk Typist I and II classifications and is not expressly identified as a distinguishing feature of either one. While their receptionist functions involve what can fairly be characterized as basic office skills, the incumbents' jobs require them to perform those functions with little if any supervision, with considerable reliance on the accuracy of their performance of those functions, and with increased demands for complete familiarity with all aspects of their respective assigned offices.

While the case is a close one, the Arbitrator concludes that the incumbents' positions have been shown to have evolved to a point where each is slightly more aptly classified as Clerk Typist II than as a Clerk Typist I.

There remains the County's contention that it is inappropriate to grant Matrise a classification for which she has not met the 55 word per minute typing speed requirement specifically set forth in the Clerk Typist II job description.

In that regard, it is undisputed that Grievant Belhumeur and each of the Clerk Typist I's reclassified during the pendency of this case have met that requirement at some point in the twelve months preceding the hearing in this matter; that Grievant Matrise declined to take such a test when the County offered her an opportunity to do so a day or two before the arbitration hearing; and that if a bidder failed to meet that requirement he or she would be deemed ineligible for promotion to a posted Clerk Typist II vacancy.

Nevertheless, Agreement Sec. 8.5 conditions the right of an employe to a higher rate only on whether the employe has been "assigned to a higher rated job for the majority of a shift," such that it is the duties and responsibilities of the job assigned, rather than the technical sufficiency of the qualifications the assigned employe possesses, that controls under that language. There could, of course, be circumstances in which an employe's lack of a specified qualification would strongly indicate that he or she could not be performing the duties and responsibilities distinguishing the higher rated classification to which the employe seeks reclassification. However the Arbitrator does not find that to be the situation in this case.

Accordingly, Grievant Matrise's entitlement to the higher rate associated with the duties and responsibilities she has performed is not undercut by her not having taken a typing test that demonstrates a net 55 word per minute rate. However, if she should have occasion in the future to bid for a different posted position in the Clerk Typist II classification or any other, her eligibility for such a position would properly be conditioned on her having met whatever typing speed requirement such posting may contain.

The Arbitrator has therefore granted the relief requested by the Union at the hearing, to wit, reclassification of both positions to Clerk Typist II effective on the date the respective grievances were filed. DECISION AND AWARD

For the foregoing reasons and based on the record as a whole, it is the decision and award of the Arbitrator on the STIPULATED ISSUES noted above that

1. The County is violating the Agreement by improperly classifying Jeanine Belhumeur as a Clerk Typist I rather than as a Clerk Typist II.

2. The County is violating the Agreement by improperly classifying Judy Matrise as a Clerk Typist I rather than as a Clerk Typist II.

3. In each case, the appropriate remedy is that the County shall immediately:

a. reclassify the Clerk Typist I positions held by Grievants Belhumeur and Matrise to the Clerk Typist II level effective retroactive to the dates their respective grievances were initiated (February 28, 1995 for Grievant Belhumeur and March 2, 1995 for Grievant Matrise); and

b. make the Grievants whole, without interest, for the difference between what they were paid and what they would have been paid had they been reclassified as of those dates.

Dated at Shorewood, Wisconsin this 24th day of June, 1996.

By Marshall L. Gratz /s/

Marshall L. Gratz, Arbitrator CLERK TYPIST I

GENERAL STATEMENT OF DUTIES: Performs routine typing and general clerical tasks related to an assigned area.

DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF THE CLASS: This is clerical work requiring basic office skills including typing, coding, filing, and the operation of various office machines. Work is characteristically repetitive and performed according to established practices and procedures. Immediate or regulated supervision is always available. Positions allocated to this class vary depending on the department to which the employee is assigned, but they are of the same level of difficulty and require similar skills. Employees in this class may be deputized to make legal actions effective for the office to which assigned.

ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS:

Types letters, memos, forms, reports, and similar materials from rough draft, transcriber or clear copy;

Files correspondence, forms, reports, and other material alphabetically, numerically, or according to other predetermined classifications;

Acts as a receptionist, answering telephone, taking messages, referring calls, and giving information as required;

Receives, processes, and distributes incoming and outgoing mail;

Duplicates, assembles, and collates materials;

Performs cashier duties receiving money and writing receipts;

Works at counter assisting public and giving out general information;

Maintains appraisal cards and files;

Maintains clerical and bookkeeping records and prepares reports;

Performs supportive typing and clerical functions;

Operates copy machine, computer terminal, and other office machines;

Performs other duties as required or assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS:

-- Essential job functions of this position require a significant amount of sitting, pushing, pulling, climbing, stooping, crouching, kneeling, reaching, and lifting and carrying a range of weight up to 30 pounds;

-- Ability to type 45 wpm net;

-- Knowledge of basic office practices and procedures;

-- Skill in the operation of a typewriter, word processor, and data entry;

-- Ability to understand and follow oral and written instructions;

-- Ability to make basic computations and tabulations accurately;

-- Ability to perform routine record keeping and filing tasks.

TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE: Possession of an Associate Degree in secretarial science, administrative assistant, info. processing, or related field; or any combination of training and experience which provides the required knowledge, skills, and abilities.

CLERK TYPIST II

GENERAL STATEMENT OF DUTIES: Performs varied typing, record-keeping, and clerical tasks as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF THE CLASS: This is responsible clerical work requiring complete familiarity with the assigned office or program. The employee must exercise judgement in the application of procedures and regulations to routine matters. Duties include typing, computer terminal operation, basic clerical account keeping, preparation of correspondence and record-keeping. Work may be performed under directed supervision depending on the nature of the assignment. Work in this class differs from that of Clerk Typist I in that it allows limited independence of action and requires a correspondingly higher degree of accuracy. Employees in this class may be deputized to make legal actions effective for the office to which assigned.

ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS:

Types letters, memos, reports, forms, charts, newsletters, and other material from rough draft, dictaphone, or clear copy;

Sorts, indexes, and files correspondence, reports, cards, folders; etc., alphabetically, numerically, or according to other predetermined classifications;

Compiles data and prepares and submits a variety of statistical reports and records for assigned program area;

Coordinates and pays bills as instructed, prepares, submits, and files invoices and payment authorizations;

Serves as receptionist, including answering phone calls, greeting visitors, recording calls, responding to routine inquiries, and referring callers to appropriate individuals;

Checks computer printouts, corrects errors, edits and files;

Composes letters from general instructions;

Schedules hearings, makes appointments, and keeps calendars;

Checks documents before recording to assure completeness and accuracy;

Receives, processes, and distributes incoming and outgoing mail;

Operates copy machine, computer terminal, memory typewriter, and other office machines as necessary;

Maintains clerical and bookkeeping records and prepares reports:

Attends meetings, takes and transcribes minutes as required;

Performs other duties as required or assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS:

-- Essential job functions of this position include a significant amount of sitting, pushing, pulling, climbing, stooping, crouching, kneeling, reaching, and lifting and carrying a range of weight up to 30 pounds;

-- Ability to type 55 wpm net;

-- Knowledge of office terminology, procedures, and equipment of the assigned office;

-- Knowledge of business math, bookkeeping practices, and English;

-- Skill in operation of typewriter, office machines, and computer terminal;

-- Clerical skills in filing, collating, and distributing;

-- Ability to communicate via telephone and in person with public and clients;

-- Ability to understand and follow written and oral instructions;

-- Ability to schedule, organize, and execute assigned tasks;

-- Ability to use word processor.

TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE: Possession of an Associate Degree in secretarial science, administrative assistant, processing, or related experience at the Clerk Typist I level; or any combination of training and experience which provides the required knowledge, skills, and abilities.