Casey M. Picard

The employer applied to challenge a Review Officer's Order finding it had contravened the Pay Equity Act.

The Tribunal found that the employer's 2002 pay equity plan was the deemed approved plan and that subsequent changes, including the introduction of salary scales, did not constitute 'changed circumstances' justifying a new plan.

The Tribunal further held that the employer's salary scales violated the Act by setting steps below the pay equity adjusted wage rate or job rate.

The Tribunal varied the Review Officer's Order, directing the employer to make retroactive adjustments, pay wage gaps, and properly distribute the mandatory 1% of payroll for pay equity adjustments.

The Employer applied to revoke a Review Officer's Order and sought a declaration that pay equity had been achieved for certain job classes.

During the hearing on the merits, the Employer's witness testified about a board motion increasing the hourly wage of the Executive Director's job class.

In this interim decision, the Tribunal directed the Employer to provide a certified copy of the official minutes of the Board meeting or an affidavit, and to clarify whether the increase was a one-time event or an annual occurrence.

The applicant mother sought judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Special Education (English) Tribunal, which upheld the school board's placement of her son, an exceptional student with Down's Syndrome, in a special education class for half the day.

The mother preferred full-time placement in a regular class with one-to-one support.

The Divisional Court determined the standard of review was reasonableness and found the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and in the child's best interests.

The Court held that total integration would work to the student's disadvantage and dismissed the application.

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Special Education (English) Tribunal.

As a preliminary matter, the Divisional Court ruled that a new assessment prepared following the tribunal hearing could not be considered on the application for judicial review.

Both parties agreed to proceed with the application without the new assessment.