Maitland Manor Health Care Centre v. Mattuci et al., 2015 CanLII 19197

Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal

PEHT Case No: 2783-09-PE

Maitland Manor Health Care Centre, Applicant v Rick Mattuci, Lori Stephens, Denise Lockie, Natalie Miltenburg, Amanda Beddow, Becky Jarvis, Angela Leggatt, Beth Sorensen, Crystal Agombar, Karen Eckenswiller and Joan McDougall, Respondents v Pay Equity Office, Intervenor

BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair

DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL: April 8, 2015

Decision

1This is an application under the Pay Equity Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.7 as amended ("the Act"). It pertains to an Order of Review Officer Tiziano Isgro dated November 12, 2009 ("the Order").

2Section 4.2(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act permits a panel of one to decide this matter.

3The hearing in this matter scheduled to continue on February 23 and 27, 2015 was adjourned by the Tribunal in decisions dated February 20 and 25, 2015 respectively, due to the sudden unavailability of counsel for the applicant. It had been the intention of counsel to present at the hearing a motion to the Tribunal for certain orders that would facilitate the preparation and posting of a pay equity plan for the applicant's non-union employees that the applicant and the Pay Equity Office agree complies with the Act.¹ In the alternative, the applicant's motion seeks an order revoking the Order.

4Although the applicant has not yet had the opportunity to present its motion in an oral hearing, it did set out its position in written submissions and other materials (referred to by the applicant as the "Motion Record") that were filed with the Tribunal on February 20, 2015 and delivered to the participating responding party employees and to the PEO. The other materials are an affidavit sworn by Bob Bass, a consultant to the applicant on matters of labour relations and pay equity, and a number of exhibits identified by, and in support of, Mr. Bass's affidavit. The affidavit sets out the facts upon which the applicant relies for the purpose of its motion.

5Neither the Tribunal nor the participating respondents have been provided with a copy of the pay equity plan upon which the applicant and the PEO collaborated. At this stage, therefore, the Tribunal has not removed the PEO as an intervening party, although the applicant contends that the PEO intends to withdraw and not participate further.

6The Tribunal directs the applicant to provide to the participating respondents and the Tribunal a copy of the proposed pay equity plan. Those copies are to be provided on or before April 15, 2015.

7The respondent employees shall have until May 15, 2015 to provide the Tribunal, the applicant and the PEO with any written submissions they wish to make regarding the applicant's "Motion Record" that was delivered to them by the applicant on or about February 20, 2015 according to counsel for the applicant's correspondence of the same date. The respondents are to indicate what facts, if any, that they disagree with in Mr. Bass's affidavit dated February 19, 2015 (at Tab 2 of the Motion Record) and the basis for their disagreement. They are also to indicate whether or not they disagree with the grounds of the applicant's motion as set out in Schedule "B" of the Motion Record (Tab 1); whether or not they disagree with the remedies requested in Schedule "A" of the Motion Record (also at Tab 1); and the basis for their disagreement with any particular item in Schedule "A" or "B". Finally, the respondent employees are invited to include any submissions concerning the proposed pay equity plan ordered to be produced in the preceding paragraph.

8Any written reply submissions that the applicant and/or the PEO may wish to make in response to those of the respondent employees must be provided on or before June 15, 2015.

9A hearing to deal with the applicant's motion will commence on August 25, 2015 at the Tribunal's offices located at 505 University Avenue, 2nd Floor Boardroom, Toronto, Ontario, beginning at 9:30 a.m.

10The applicant is directed to ensure the attendance of Mr. Bass at the hearing for the purpose of examination on his affidavit, if the hearing panel deems it appropriate.

Footnotes

1. 1The terms of this without-prejudice pay equity plan have not been disclosed to the Tribunal. It would appear that the applicant and the PEO engaged successfully in an exercise on a without prejudice basis to prepare a pay equity plan that the PEO would accept as compliant with the Act should the applicant obtain the primary relief sought in its motion.