Pay equity hearings tribunal
0755-03 Pay Equity Office, Applicant v Kairos Youth Residential Centre and Hope Kempe, Respondent
Before: Mary Ellen Cummings, Chair; Catherine Bickley and Diane Rose, Members
Cite as: Kairos Youth Residential Centre, (Pay Equity Office) (May 5, 2003) 0755-03 (P.E.H.T.)
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, May 5, 2003
This file is a Referral by the Pay Equity Office (“the Office”), brought pursuant to subsection 24(5) of the Pay Equity Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P-7 (“the Act”). The Office alleges that Kairos Youth Residential Centre (“the Employer”) has not complied with the Order of a Review Officer dated November 13, 2002.
Subsection 24(5) of the Act provides as follows:
24(5) Where an employer or a bargaining agent fails to comply with an order under this section, a review officer may refer the matter to the Hearings Tribunal.
(5.1) The Pay Equity Office shall be deemed to be the applicant for a reference under subsection (5).
(5.2) On a reference under subsection (5), the Hearings Tribunal shall not consider the merits of the order that is the subject of the reference.
(5.3) On a reference under subsection (5), the person against whom the order was made has the burden of proving that he, she or it has complied with the order.
The Order required the Employer to resume paying the pay equity adjustments required under its pay equity plan, in accordance with section 21.22(2) and to make retroactive payments of the pay equity adjustments that it had failed to make. The Review Officer had found that the Employer paid out no adjustments after February 2000.
The Office is of the opinion that the Order had not been complied with and asks the Tribunal to order the Employer to comply with the Order.
The Office provided a Statement of Service, indicating that it had served the Employer with this Referral by regular mail on March 27, 2003. The effective date of service, in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice (Rule 26) is April 4, 2003. A response should have been served on the other parties on April 18, 2003 (Rule 19) and filed with the Tribunal within 5 days of that date (Rule 20). No response has been filed by the Employer.
The Tribunal has received a Response from Hope Kempe, who is identified in the Order as the applicant. She asks the Tribunal to order the remedies sought by the Office.
The Office’s assertion that its Order has not been complied with is unchallenged. The Tribunal concludes, then that the Order of November 13, 2002 has not been complied with by the Employer.
The Tribunal hereby orders Kairos Residential Youth Centre to comply with the Review Officer’s Order of November 13, 2002.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 5^th^ day of May, 2003.
Mary Ellen Cummings, Chair
Catherine Bickley, Member
Diane Rose, Member