Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal
PEHT Case No: 2390-19-PE
Sharon Nolan-Conway, Applicant v City of Toronto, Respondent
PEHT Case No: 2391-19-PE
Joanne Greene, Applicant v City of Toronto, Respondent
BEFORE: M. David Ross, Chair, and Members Patricia Greenside and Carol Phillips
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL: August 28, 2020
These are applications under the Pay Equity Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.7, as amended (“the Act”).
By decision dated May 7, 2020, the Tribunal directed submissions with respect to a disclosure issue that had arisen between them. This panel has considered the submissions.
The applicants request the Tribunal to direct the respondent to produce the “rating notes for all non union jobs” and “the initial ratings prepared by the Hay Consultant for the HR jobs”. The applicants submit that these documents are arguably relevant to the issue of whether the jobs were evaluated in isolation, and is not sought for the purpose of identifying flaws in the ratings of individual job classes. The respondent has objected to this production request on the basis that it is irrelevant to the preliminary issue, that it is a fishing expedition, and alternatively, that it is overly broad.
The standard for production at this stage of the proceeding is “arguable relevance”. We find that these categories of documents sought could shed light on the process of how these job classes were rated, and therefore are arguably relevant. We wish to be clear that the respondent retains the right to object to the introduction of any of these documents on the basis of them not being relevant, if, and when the applicants seek to introduce them into evidence.
We also agree with the respondent that the request is overly broad. The applicants have only asserted that their job classes were not rated in accordance with the Act and asserted that both should have been placed in one band higher. Neither application challenges the validity of the entire plan. As such, we find that documents which are arguably relevant only pertain to the job classes which were placed in bands 7, 8, and 9, the bands in issue in these matters. We wish to be clear that if after reviewing the documents produced, the applicants have a basis to believe that there are further documents that should be produced which are not covered by this direction, the applicants can make that request at a later date, setting out their full reasons for why further production is warranted.
The respondent is directed to produce these documents to the applicants’ counsel by no later than September 17, 2020.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 28th day of August, 2020.
"M. David Ross" Chair "Patricia Greenside" Member "Carol Phillips" Member