Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal
722-01 Denise Couvillon, Applicant v. La Cité collégiale, Respondent; Johanne Bray, Affected Party
Before: Mary Ellen Cummings, Chair; Catherine Bickley and Margaret Kvetan, Members
Cite as: La Cité collégiale (No. 2) (December 20, 2002) 0722-01 (P.E.H.T.)
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, DECEMBER 20, 2002
[1]. The Tribunal convened a conference call on December 18, 2002 with all the parties to address two issues; a disagreement about precisely what documents need to be produced by the employer to Ms Bray pursuant to an earlier disclosure order made on October 2, 2002, and a request by the employer and Ms Couvillon to adjourn this proceeding to continue their settlement discussions. Ms Bray opposes the adjournment request on the basis, principally, that she has been excluded from any settlement discussions.
Ms Bray’s Role in Settlement of the Application
[2]. The exchange among the panel and the parties revealed that Ms Couvillon and the employer have reached an agreement in principal and that both parties are optimistic that a settlement can be reached. If that occurs, their intention is that Ms Couvillon will withdraw her Application from the Tribunal. Since Ms Couvillon’s Application arises from a Review Officer’s decision not to issue an Order, there is no outstanding Review Officer’s Order to be concerned about.
[3]. Ms Bray’s role in this proceeding arises because the employer identified her as a person who may have an interest in the proceeding. She and others were given notice, and Ms Bray filed a response. Whether in fact she does have an interest has not yet been determined.
[4]. Ms Bray is concerned that if Ms Couvillon withdraws her Application, the Tribunal will not have the opportunity to address any pay equity concerns of others in the same workplace. The Tribunal confirmed that her perception was true. The Tribunal is not looking at a generalized complaint about “pay equity issues” in this workplace. Rather, the Tribunal must consider the Application to the Tribunal that arose from Ms Couvillon’s particular complaint to Review Services. The focus of this proceeding will always be on Ms Couvillon’s complaint and subsequent Application. Notice of the Application was given to other employees because the Tribunal and the employer recognized that its resolution might affect their rights and interests. If Ms. Bray has a particular complaint she may make it to Review Services.
Outstanding Production
[5]. We have considered the employer’s submission that the whole of the job evaluation Manual is not arguably relevant. We are satisfied that it is. Counsel agreed that the samples or examples provided by the Council to the Colleges were relied on to some extent by the evaluation committee of the employer. In our view, that is enough to make the whole of the document arguably relevant, even if the samples or examples were not relied on specifically in the evaluation of the job class Ms. Bray held.
[6]. Ms Bray would like the Tribunal to order the job evaluation manual produced before Ms Couvillon has the opportunity to withdraw her Application. The Tribunal declines to do so. As set out above, Ms. Bray’s role in this proceeding arises only from the possibility that she may be affected by its outcome. Absent her role in this proceeding, Ms. Bray would not be entitled to document disclosure from the employer. In our view, if the principal parties to the dispute are, as they claim, close to settling, it is appropriate to wait a short period of time to see if this Application is withdrawn before making any further production orders.
[7]. Counsel for Ms Couvillon and the employer indicated that they will know by January 6, 2003 if their discussions are fruitful. If the Tribunal does not receive correspondence seeking to withdraw this Application by January 7, 2003, the employer is directed to produce the entire Manual to Ms Bray by no later than January 10, 2003.
Dated at Toronto this 20^th^ day of December, 2002
_____________________
Mary Ellen Cummings,
Chair
_____________________
Catherine Bickley,
Member
_____________________
Margaret Kvetan,
Member