Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal
0385‑92 York Region Board of Education, Applicant v. York Region Women Teachers' Association and Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation, York Region District, Respondents
0450‑93 York Region Women Teachers' Association and Ontario Public School Teachers' federation, York Region District, Applicants v. York Region Board of Education, Respondent
Appearances: Victoria Reaume, Lorraine Stewart, Regine Baker and Fred Mayor for the York Region Women Teachers' Association and the Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation, York Region District
Angela Rae, Colette Nemni and Maria Ciani for York Region Board of Education
Before: Mary Anne McKellar, Vice‑Chair and Members Geri Sheedy and Charles Taccone
Cite As: York Region Board of Education (4 January 1995) 0385‑92; 0450‑93 (P.E.H.T.)
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, JANUARY 4, 1995
1At the close of the case for the York Region Board of Education ("the Board"), the York Region Women Teachers' Association and the Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation, York Region District ("the Branch Affiliates"), without being put to their election, brought a motion to non‑suit the Board in respect of its Application in Tribunal File 0385‑92. That motion for non‑suit is dismissed. In accordance with our earlier oral ruling, no reasons for that decision will be given.
2In the course of reviewing the evidence for the purpose of disposing of the non‑suit motion, the panel determined that, prior to the commencement of the Branch Affiliates' case, it would like to hear legal submissions on the following issue, which the parties should be prepared to address at the resumption of this hearing on January 17, 1995:
Where a female job class and all potential male comparators for that female job class receive remuneration in the form of an annual salary as opposed to an hourly wage, how relevant to the determination of "job rate" under the Pay Equity Act are the hours worked by the incumbents of those job classes, having regard to the fact that the Act is concerned with the rate for the job and not the rate for the incumbent? In other words, is salary, as an annual pay, representative of compensation for the "successful" disposition of an assigned responsibility irrespective of actual time expended in its performance by the particular job incumbent such that reducing salary to a rate per hour worked necessarily introduces an inappropriate element of incumbent performance into the determination of job rate?