Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal
1140-08-PE Kirk Windibank, Applicant v. Corporation of the City of Windsor, Respondent.
BEFORE: Mary Anne McKellar, Vice-Chair, Pauline R. Seville and Margaret Kvetan, Members.
CITE AS: City of Windsor 1140-08-PE (17 September 2008) (P.E.H.T.)
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL: September 17, 2008
- We issued a decision dated July 10, 2008 in which we directed the applicant to address a preliminary question as to our jurisdiction to deal with his application. We have reviewed his submissions on that question, and it appears that we may have jurisdiction. We remain concerned, however, about the issues we identified in paragraph 22 of our July 10, 2008 decision:
- The Applicant should also be aware that even if he were to persuade us that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal in the first instance with an objection to a posted plan, in the circumstances of this case, the Applicant’s purported objection raises additional concerns:
(a) does an individual whose employment ceased some years ago have standing under the Act to comment on or object to a re-posted pay equity plan that contains no revisions pertinent to any job class he occupied during the course of his employment?;
(b) is it not an abuse of the Tribunal’s process for an Applicant to raise an issue he has already sought to have litigated and where the Tribunal has already adjudicated on his right to do so?
- The applicant is directed to deliver to the respondent and file with the Registrar by no later than October 10, 2008, written submissions addressing the above issues. The respondent need not file any submissions in reply unless the Tribunal directs it to do so.
Dated at Toronto this 17th day of September, 2008.
“Mary Anne McKellar”______
Mary Anne McKellar
“Pauline R. Seville”__________
Pauline R. Seville
“Margaret Kvetan”___________
Margaret Kvetan