Court File and Parties

PEHT Case No: 2512-15-PE Pay Equity Office, Applicant v Sexual Assault Support Centre of Ottawa, Respondent

PEHT Case No: 2605-15-PE Sexual Assault Support Centre of Ottawa (SASC), Applicant v Pay Equity Office, Respondent

BEFORE: Mary Anne McKellar, Chair

DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL: August 24, 2016

Introduction

1These are applications in respect of a Review Officer’s Order (“the Order”) issued under the Pay Equity Act, 1995 (“the Act”).

2Section 4.2(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act permits this decision to be made by a one-person panel.

3The Order directed the Sexual Assault Support Centre of Ottawa (“the Employer”) to take a number of steps to determine and pay out pay equity adjustments to its employees.

4Case No. 2512-15-PE is a referral by the Pay Equity Office under section 24(5) of the Act for enforcement of the Order. That application was held in abeyance when the Employer filed an application in Case No. 2605-15-PE objecting to the Order.

5By decision dated July 15, 2016, I directed the following with respect to these files:

a) That Case No. 2605-15-PE proceed to a Pre-Hearing Conference and hearing if necessary in respect of the sole issue of whether one employee’s (Susan Havart) execution of a release deprived her of entitlement to the amount that the Review Officer found was otherwise owing to her; and

b) That the Employer file submissions in respect of Case No. 2512-15-PE setting out why the Tribunal should not simply grant the relief requested by the Office in respect of all employees other than Ms. Havart, whose entitlement is at issue in Case No. 2605-15-PE.

6A Pre-Hearing Conference in Case No. 2605-15-PE has been scheduled to take place at the Tribunal’s premises in Toronto on September 9, 2016.

New Information

7Subsequent to the release of my July 15, 2016 decision, the Employer has alerted the Tribunal to the following:

a) That no employee filed a response in Case No. 2605-15-PE, and that Ms. Havart has not received notice of the Pre-Hearing Conference, such that it is not clear if she is aware of the issue raised by the Employer in this proceeding respecting her entitlement; and

b) That the Employer has made or scheduled a number of pay equity payments to its other employees in furtherance of the Order that is the subject of the referral in Case No. 2512-15-PE, and that it has kept the Pay Equity Office apprised of those efforts.

Case No. 2605-15-PE

8Based on the above new information, it seems to me that it may be premature to hold a Pre-Hearing Conference in respect of Case No. 2605-15-PE. The Pre-Hearing Conference scheduled for September 9, 2016 on that file is hereby cancelled. As indicated below, however, the Tribunal will hold that date until September 1, 2016, in the event that the parties in Case No. 2512-15-PE wish to use it.

9With respect to Case No. 2605-15-PE, I make the following directions:

a) the Employer shall prepare brief written submissions (including a copy of the release that it relies on) setting out why it says Ms. Havart is not entitled to any pay equity payment, and deliver them to her at her last known address and file them with the Tribunal on or before September 9, 2016.

b) The Employer shall also provide the Registrar of the Tribunal with Ms. Havart’s address information for our records.

c) Ms. Havart shall then have 10 working days in which to deliver to the Employer and file with the Tribunal any written submissions in opposition to those of the Employer.

d) If Ms. Havart does not file any submissions, the Tribunal will presume that she agrees that she is not entitled to any monies pursuant to the Order, and that the Order should be varied accordingly.

Case No. 2512-15-PE

10Based on the new information, it appears to me that it is not appropriate to simply grant the relief requested by the Pay Equity Office in Case No. 2512-15-PE given the steps to make pay equity payments that the Employer has taken since the Order issued. It is clear from the Employer’s correspondence to the Tribunal, however, that there are some outstanding issues with respect to payments to some individuals.

11It is not clear to me what position the Pay Equity Office takes with respect to what, if anything, the Tribunal should do with this file at this point. In somewhat similar cases in the past, matters have been adjourned sine die on consent while steps towards compliance are ongoing. In others, steps towards compliance have been worked out in the context of a Pre-Hearing Conference.

12I direct the Pay Equity Office to advise the Employer and the Tribunal by no later than September 1, 2016 of its position respecting how this matter should proceed, and in particular to clarify whether it wishes to have the September 9, 2016 date used for a Pre-Hearing Conference in respect of Case No. 2512-15-PE. Any such Pre-Hearing Conference may proceed electronically if the parties agree, and advise the Registrar.

13This matter is referred to the Registrar.