5 total
Tribunal specifies procedures for maintaining pay equity using the proxy method of comparison.
The applicant employer sought a hearing before the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal regarding a Review Officer's order concerning the maintenance of pay equity using the proxy method of comparison.
The Tribunal was tasked with specifying procedures to ensure employees who established pay equity through the proxy method continue to have access to male comparators for maintenance, following a Court of Appeal decision.
The Tribunal held that an organization that established its pay equity plan using the proxy method must continue to use it for maintenance unless changed circumstances under section 14.1 of the Pay Equity Act permit another method.
The Tribunal directed the parties to identify a proxy employer, request information, evaluate key female job classes, and determine whether any pay equity gaps have re-emerged, noting that arguments regarding non-discriminatory factors for pay differentials should be addressed under section 8 of the Act.
Bill 124 struck down as unconstitutional for violating public sector workers' freedom of association.
The applicants, representing various public sector unions, challenged the constitutionality of the Protecting a Sustainable Public Sector for Future Generations Act, 2019 (Bill 124), which limited wage increases for broader public sector employees to 1% per year for a three-year moderation period.
The court found that the Act substantially interfered with the applicants' right to freedom of association under s. 2(d) of the Charter by preventing meaningful collective bargaining over wages and other compensation-related issues.
The court dismissed the applicants' claims under s. 2(b) (freedom of expression) and s. 15 (equality rights).
The court further held that the infringement of s. 2(d) was not saved by s. 1 of the Charter, as the government failed to demonstrate a pressing and substantial objective or that the measure was minimally impairing.
The Act was declared void and of no effect.
Proxy pay equity must be maintained, but not by ongoing proxy comparisons.
These applications concerned whether pay equity achieved through proxy pay equity plans in female-dominated long-term care workplaces must be maintained by continued reference to proxy establishments.
The Tribunal held that the Pay Equity Act imposes a maintenance obligation on proxy plans, but that maintenance does not require ongoing monitoring of changes in compensation or job value in the proxy employer’s establishment.
Instead, maintenance is to be carried out internally by monitoring the compensation/value relationship already established for the key and non-key female job classes.
The Tribunal also rejected the section 15 Charter challenge and held that workplace changes affecting job value made the existing $1.50 plans inappropriate absent a negotiated gender-neutral comparison system.
The matter was adjourned for nine months with directions to negotiate an amendment to the plans.
Application to compress female wage grid to match male comparator grid dismissed under Pay Equity Act.
The applicant union filed an objection under the Pay Equity Act, arguing that the wage grid for female job classes should be compressed to match the shorter wage grid of their male comparators in another bargaining unit.
The Tribunal found that the union was not estopped from raising the issue, but concluded that the Pay Equity Act does not require the equalization of wage grid structures, only the adjustment of job rates.
The Tribunal also dismissed the argument that the differing grid structures violated the Human Rights Code, noting that the Pay Equity Act is a comprehensive scheme akin to a special program.
The application was dismissed.
The Pay Equity Act requires equalization of the maximum job rate, not entire wage grids.
The applicant union sought an order requiring the employer hospital to adjust the wage grids for female job classes in its clerical bargaining unit to mirror the wage grids for male comparator job classes in its service bargaining unit, including the rate of progression through the grid.
The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the Pay Equity Act only requires adjustments to the 'job rate' (the highest rate of compensation available to a job class) to achieve pay equity.
The Act does not mandate the equalization of entire wage grids or rates of progression below the job rate, which remain matters for collective bargaining.