PAY EQUITY HEARINGS TRIBUNAL
0020-09-PE Phung Kim Quach, Applicant v. St. Christopher House, and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3393, Respondents.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair, Pauline R. Seville and Margaret Kvetan, Members.
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL: August 3, 2010
1This is an application to the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal under subsection 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.7, as amended (“the Act”).
2By decision dated October 19, 2009 we directed the respondents to continue to negotiate a pay equity plan in accordance with the Act, and we directed the respondent employer to post the agreed pay equity plan in the workplace and provide the applicant a copy, on or before June 30, 2010.
3The Board is in receipt of correspondence dated July 6, 2010 and August 3, 2010 from the applicant. It would appear that the applicant received a copy of the pay equity plan prepared by the respondents. She appears to be of the view that the pay equity plan does not comply with the Act. Her letter of August 3, 2010 sets out in detail her criticisms of the posted plan, and in it she asks the Tribunal to render a final decision in her favour.
4Our decision of October 19, 2009 was a final decision in this matter. Therefore, to the extent the applicant wishes to pursue a complaint that the pay equity plan does not comply with the Act, she must file a fresh complaint with the Pay Equity Commission pursuant to section 22 of the Act.
Dated at Toronto this 3rd day of August, 2010.
“Patrick Kelly”
Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair
“Pauline R. Seville”
Pauline R. Seville, Member
“Margaret Kvetan”
Margaret Kvetan, Member