5 total
Tribunal ordered the posting of an agreed-upon pay equity plan following a settlement.
The parties reached a written settlement of the matters in dispute regarding a pay equity plan, replacing the plan previously ordered by the Review Officer.
In accordance with section 25.1 of the Pay Equity Act, the Tribunal noted the settlement was binding and ordered that the agreed-upon pay equity plan be posted in the workplace forthwith.
Employer cannot rely on bargaining strength exception to pay equity maintenance until equity achieved establishment-wide.
The Employer objected to a Review Officer's Order finding it failed to maintain pay equity for female job classes represented by CUPE 1734.
The Employer argued that wage disparities were due to differences in bargaining strength under s. 8(2) of the Pay Equity Act.
The Tribunal held that s. 8(2) cannot be relied upon because pay equity had not yet been achieved for all employees in the establishment, specifically the teachers.
The Tribunal also found that CUPE 1734 was not complicit in the Employer's contravention, as the union had attempted to negotiate maintenance and subsequently filed a complaint.
The Employer's application was dismissed and the Order confirmed, except for the requirement that the union post a notice.
Actual hours worked are irrelevant to determining job rate when comparators receive annual salaries.
During a pay equity hearing, the Tribunal posed a question to the parties regarding the relevance of actual hours worked when determining the 'job rate' for female job classes and male comparators who are all paid an annual salary.
The Tribunal ruled that actual hours worked are irrelevant to the determination of job rate in these circumstances.
Converting an annual salary to an hourly rate based on actual hours worked would introduce an inappropriate element of incumbent performance into the calculation of the rate for the job class.
Motion for non-suit dismissed; parties directed to make submissions on job rate determination.
The Branch Affiliates brought a motion to non-suit the York Region Board of Education at the close of the Board's case.
The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal dismissed the motion without requiring the Branch Affiliates to be put to their election.
The Tribunal also directed the parties to prepare legal submissions on the relevance of hours worked to the determination of 'job rate' under the Pay Equity Act when the job classes receive an annual salary.
Individual employees represented by a union lack standing to intervene in pay equity plan proceedings.
A group of individual teachers sought standing to participate in Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal proceedings regarding a pay equity plan negotiated between their employer and their bargaining agent.
The Tribunal dismissed their application and denied them intervenor status, finding that the Pay Equity Act does not provide individual employees represented by a bargaining agent with a statutory role in the preparation of a pay equity plan.
Furthermore, the teachers did not have a direct legal interest that would entitle them to party status at law, as the proceedings would not threaten the existence of their employment contracts or reduce their actual remuneration.
