OPEHT 2011

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party health care group.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant employer filed an application under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act seeking to revoke or vary two orders issued by a Review Officer.

The Tribunal issued preliminary directions requiring the employer to post and mail notices of the application to current and former employees, and directing the Pay Equity Office to mail notices to a confidential employee.

The applicant and the Pay Equity Office requested that a scheduled hearing be converted into a pre-hearing conference to deal with preliminary matters, and that the second hearing date be cancelled.

The Tribunal noted that a pre-hearing conference cannot make binding decisions.

Therefore, the Tribunal maintained the first hearing date before a full panel to decide the preliminary issues, and cancelled the second date.

The Tribunal also amended the style of cause to add a respondent who had delivered but not filed a response.

The Pay Equity Office referred a matter to the Tribunal under section 25(5) of the Pay Equity Act.

The employer filed a response challenging the merits of the Review Officer's Order.

Because the Tribunal cannot consider the merits of an Order on a section 25(5) referral, it deemed the employer's response to be an application under section 25(6) of the Act.

The Tribunal issued procedural directions requiring the employer to post and mail notices to affected employees.

The employer, A.G. Simpson Automotive Inc., filed an application with the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act to vary two orders issued by a Review Officer.

The Review Officer had ordered the employer to post a pay equity plan based on previous determinations and to seek male comparators from bargaining unit positions.

The employer sought approval for a revised pay equity plan that changed the point spread for banding jobs, allowing for non-union male comparators.

The Tribunal issued a Notice to Employees advising them of the application and their right to participate by filing a Response.

The Township of McGarry filed an application with the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act to revoke an Order issued by a Review Officer, asserting that no pay equity adjustments were owing to its employees.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the non-union employees of the Township, informing them of their right to participate in the proceedings.

The notice outlined the steps and deadlines for employees to file a Response if they wished to be involved in the hearing.

The applicant employer filed an application under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act.

The Pay Equity Office filed a motion seeking standing to intervene.

The Tribunal granted an extension of time for the union and affected employees to file responses, as the union was not originally given notice.

The Tribunal also set a schedule for written submissions regarding the Pay Equity Office's motion to intervene and any objections to the union's standing, and cancelled the scheduled pre-hearing consultation.

The applicant requested an adjournment sine die during the hearing.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal consented to adjourn the hearing sine die for a period of three months, after which the matter will be deemed terminated unless a party requests to proceed.

The employer, A.G. Simpson Automotive Inc., filed an application with the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act to vary two Orders issued by a Review Officer.

The Review Officer had ordered the employer to post a pay equity plan using bargaining unit male comparators for non-union female-dominated jobs.

The employer sought approval for an alternative plan that changed the point spread for job banding, allowing for non-union male comparators, which it asserted would result in higher pay equity adjustments.

The Tribunal issued a Notice to Employees advising them of the application and their right to participate in the proceedings.

The applicant employer filed an application under section 24(6) of the Pay Equity Act to vary two orders issued by a Review Officer regarding the posting of a pay equity plan and the selection of male comparators.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal directed the employer to post and mail notices of the application to all affected current and former employees, and to inform the Tribunal upon compliance.

The Employer appealed a Review Officer's Order regarding pay equity liability calculations, arguing the compounding formula used may have been incorrect based on its auditors' advice.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal found the application lacked sufficient detail to notify affected employees, as it did not specify the alleged error or the resulting changes to amounts owed.

The Tribunal ordered the Employer to file an Amended Application detailing the formulas and revised amounts, supported by a letter from its auditors, failing which the application would be deemed terminated.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal issued procedural directions ahead of a hearing scheduled for March 25, 2011.

The applicant was directed to file its statement of issues, position, facts, witness list, and documents within 15 days.

The respondent was directed to file its response within 10 days thereafter, and the applicant was given 5 days to file a reply.