Other Tribunals - OPEHT

The applicant employer brought a motion to dismiss the application on a prima facie basis, arguing that the Review Officer's findings and the responding employee's pleadings did not raise a prima facie violation of the Pay Equity Act.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal declined to dispose of the matter on a prima facie basis and directed that the matter proceed to a hearing on the merits.

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

The Tribunal acknowledged receipt of the respondent's written submissions regarding the applicant's preliminary motion and granted the applicant until June 30, 2016, to file reply submissions.

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

The Tribunal noted that the applicant and the responding party employee had failed to file their written submissions on a preliminary motion with the Tribunal, having only exchanged them with each other.

The Tribunal directed the responding party to file her written submissions forthwith, failing which the preliminary matter would be determined based solely on the applicant's submissions.

The responding parties requested an extension of the deadline for filing a response.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal granted the request, extending the deadline to June 20, 2016.

The decision was issued by a single panel member pursuant to section 4.2(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The applicant filed an objection to an amended pay equity plan with the Pay Equity Office.

The Office advised it would not investigate and that the Tribunal must hold a hearing.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file a completed Application and Statement of Service by May 19, 2016, failing which her objection would be deemed abandoned.

The Pay Equity Office referred a matter to the Tribunal, asserting that the Employer failed to comply with a Review Officer's Order.

The Employer did not file a response or communicate with the Tribunal.

In the absence of a response, the Tribunal concluded that the Employer had not complied with the Order and directed that an order would be made against the Employer unless submissions were filed by a specified date.

The Pay Equity Commission brought an application under section 24(5) of the Pay Equity Act alleging that the employer failed to comply with a Review Officer's orders to pay specified amounts to employees.

The employer did not file a response.

The Tribunal determined to proceed by written hearing and directed the employer to file written submissions establishing compliance, noting that the employer bears the onus of proof under section 24(5.3) of the Act.

At a pre-hearing conference for an application under the Pay Equity Act, the Tribunal found that the applicant's pleadings did not clearly set out the facts relied upon to assert a contravention by the responding hospital.

The Tribunal directed the self-represented applicant to file written representations answering specific questions about his requests for a pay raise and his assertion that he should be paid at the Senior Scientist rate, and set a schedule for the hospital's response.

The applicant and one of the responding parties, Longina Frydrych, reached an agreement.

Having regard to this agreement, the Ontario Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal adjourned the matter sine die for a period of one year.

The Tribunal noted that unless a party requests the matter be scheduled for a hearing within that period, it will be deemed terminated without further notice.

The applicant requested an extension of timelines for filing submissions, with the consent of the responding party.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal granted the request and amended its previous decision to set new deadlines for the delivery and filing of submissions, and directed the Registrar to schedule two days of hearing.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal received a request to schedule a two-day hearing regarding an outstanding issue concerning the gender of a job class.

The Tribunal issued procedural directions requiring the applicant and respondent to file statements of issues, facts, witness lists, and documents within specified timelines.

The matter was referred to the Registrar to schedule the hearing.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the application, which the Tribunal granted.

The application was adjourned sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The applicant filed a request for reconsideration of four previous Tribunal decisions concerning her pay equity complaint.

The Tribunal found that the requests regarding the three 2009 decisions were filed well beyond the 20-day time limit under Rule 81, with no reasons provided for the delay.

While the request regarding the August 2010 decision was timely, the Tribunal found no extraordinary circumstances—such as new evidence, a significant change in circumstances, or an error of law—to justify reconsideration.

The Tribunal reiterated that the applicant's concerns about the newly negotiated pay equity plan's compliance must be raised in a fresh complaint under section 22 of the Pay Equity Act.

The application for reconsideration was dismissed.

The Pay Equity Commission brought a referral application under section 24(5) of the Pay Equity Act.

The responding party failed to file submissions in response to a previous decision.

The Tribunal found that the responding party had not complied with the Order issued against it and directed the payment of $5,268.35 plus interest to the affected employee.

The Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation and the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board filed applications with the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal.

The parties subsequently reached a settlement.

The Tribunal noted that under subsection 25.1 of the Pay Equity Act, settlements are binding and can be the subject of a complaint if not complied with.

The Tribunal closed its files.

The parties agreed to adjourn the scheduled hearing.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal adjourned the matters sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which they will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The Pay Equity Commission referred a matter to the Tribunal, alleging that the employer failed to comply with a Review Officer's Order directing it to take steps to achieve pay equity.

The employer failed to respond to the application, attend the pre-hearing conference, or provide submissions.

The Tribunal found that the employer failed to meet its onus under the Pay Equity Act to demonstrate compliance, and confirmed the employer's non-compliance with the Order.

The applicant wrote to the Tribunal alleging that the pay equity plan posted by the respondents, pursuant to a previous Tribunal order, did not comply with the Pay Equity Act.

She requested a final decision in her favour.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, noting that its previous decision was final and that any new allegations of non-compliance must be pursued by filing a fresh complaint with the Pay Equity Commission under section 22 of the Act.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal varied its decision dated December 18, 2009, which had directed the responding party to pay pay equity adjustments to 11 former employees.

The Tribunal acknowledged it had failed to consider affidavit evidence identifying a twelfth employee owed adjustments.

The Tribunal varied the Review Officer's Order to direct the responding party to pay $19,303.13 in trust for the twelfth employee, subject to post-judgment interest.

The applicant union sought to quantify and enforce a Review Officer's order regarding retroactive pay equity adjustments owed by the respondent employer.

The respondent failed to participate in the proceedings.

Based on an affidavit provided by the applicant detailing the amounts owed to eleven former employees, and despite a late objection from a principal of the respondent who provided no alternative calculations, the Tribunal varied the Review Officer's order to specify the exact amounts owed and directed the respondent to pay them within 30 days.