Contents
Alliance Vol. 11 No. 2 Summer 1998
PSAC Home Page d'accueil français
Editorial - Workers offered crumbs while senior managers get 'obscene' raises
Feature - PSAC members across the country continue to display their "Where's Our Raise" stickers in their workplaces. When they heard the senior mandarins were getting obscene raises and big bonuses they reacted with anger. Treasury Board has dragged its feet at negotiations for over a year now.
Classification - Membership strength and soldarity together with the willingness to strike by members at the National Museums resulted in the development of a joint evaluation plan.
Retirees' Association - Planning to retire but you would like to continue to be part of the PSAC? It's taken 10 years but APSAR is up and running Association of Public Service Alliance Retirees.
Health & Safety - Perfumes, after shave and other fragrances are making more and more people sick. The effect of perfume on sensitized individuals is often much more serious than just a runny nose and a headache.
Victories - On April 9 they had the official sod-turning ceremony for a $30-million expansion of the Winnipeg Mint which means at least 30 more jobs for PSAC members. On March 28 the government announced that the 27 West Coast lightstations destined for destaffing would maintain their keepers.
Universal Classification Standard - The Alliance remains committed to monitoring the project and providing input to Treasury Board. Members will continue to be asked for their help either as 'fresh eyes' for the Working Group or by assisting in the training of other members.
Pay Equity - The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will release its decision in July. With the release of the decision comes new questions which we have attempted to answer.
Membership services - Some of the benefits of being a PSAC member.
Workers offered crumbs while
senior managers get 'obscene' raises There are times when I truly wonder if the federal government, and in particular Treasury Board President Marcel Massé, has the ability to separate fact from fiction. I often wonder if they actually believe the statements they make which cannot be reconciled with reality.
I am referring to their pronouncements about the compensation they say they are paying certain groups versus what they are actually paying. This confusion extends to their suggestion as to what our members employed by Treasury Board should accept in this round of bargaining.
In 1996, the then Treasury Board Secretary Peter Harder stated there is no way anyone would be allowed to make up for the money lost during the past six years of wage freezes. Massé himself has repeated this many times. However, the facts speak to a much different story.
In just over a one month period this spring the government announced four different compensation packages covering some 75,000 people on the federal payroll. Almost all of the announcements were made on Fridays when there is traditionally little media coverage. In each case the increases were in excess of the government's stated salary cap.
Judges will receive increases of at least 12%. The military will see their pay rise in excess of 9% and the pay for the RCMP goes up a total 12.85% by the year 2001. The Commission on Judges' Salaries and Benefits is the most forthright when it stated the increase was designed to "...ensure the erosion of their salary base...is effectively corrected.".
It is my view that all of these increases are legitimate and quite defensible. The only thing that taints these levels of compensation is the extent to which the government has gone to hide them and to misrepresent why they are being received. If it were not for our research and digging for information, they may very well have passed relatively unnoticed. You are welcome to read the PSAC submission to the Senate Finance Committee on Senior Level Retention and Compensation for full details on our website.
And, for the Executive group, we are not opposed to an increase to the base rates of pay. However, we stop short of endorsing the staggering 17.4% increase in the minimum salary of the EX-1 category. Nor can we condone the 10.95-19.35% increases at the Deputy Minister level. What the government has done in terms of increases to the level of "performance Pay" is nothing short of disgusting. It is an insult to front-line workers who are being told to expect an increase in the 1-1/2% range.
It is abundantly clear that there are two standards at work when the government speaks about compensating its workforce. Compensation for the senior ranks reaches the obscene while the workers are supposed to settle for crumbs. In 1991 a Conciliation Board suggested that a 6% wage increase was not out of line. Since 1991 the wages for these workers have increased by 3% while the average private sector wage has increased by 12%. It is obvious that "catch up" must be included in some measure during this round of bargaining. It has been included for the groups mentioned above and we deserve nothing less.
It's time to examine the value of front-line federal workers. You are worth it!
Daryl T. Bean, National President
The Military's pay is going up. The RCMP are getting a raise and so are the
public service managers and Federal Court, Tax Court and Superior Court Judges. But for
PSAC members the wait continues. Since negotiations began over a year ago Treasury Board
has been dragging its feet. It has only been since Conciliation meetings at Table 1 with
Conciliation Officer Norman Bernstein got under way in April that some progress has been
made on non-monetary issues.
The only hint of a wage increase for Alliance members came from Treasury Board President Marcel Massé through the media. At the same time as he was announcing significant increases for the mandarins in the federal public service, he stated that the government plans to spend about 8% over four years on the rank and file. While trying to justify to Canadian taxpayers why they were spending $68-million plus for the upper echelon he failed to tell them that Treasury Board is currently conducting negotiations with the bargaining agents and using every tactic in the book to delay reaching a settlement.
When Alliance members heard his statements about the exhorbitant increases for the bureaucrats in comparison to the value he places on the rank and file they reacted with anger. They sent letters to the editor of local newspapers, they sent faxes to Treasury Board demanding the same respect and asking "Where's OUR Raise?". They also e-mailed the Alliance to let us know what they thought of their employer's statements.
The Alliance is not opposed to the increases that have been approved for the military,
the judiciary, the RCMP or most of the Executive Group. Nor is it opposed to the notion
that these workers should receive increases that compensate for at least part of the loss
experienced during the wage freeze. But what the Alliance is opposed to is the
government's double standards and its unending hypocrisy when it comes to wage increases
that could penalize our members yet again. 
Since 1996 Treasury Board has stated, and continues to state, that 'there is no new money and we cannot go back and recoup what you may feel that your members have lost over the last six years'. In other words, don't look for any 'catch-up'. But guess what? This government has been doing just the opposite when it comes to certain federal government groups.
Simply put, they are disguising 'catch-up' for the military, the RCMP, public service executives and the judiciary.
On May 6, the Alliance appeared before the Senate Committee on National Finance to denounce the appalling way in which increases have been approved or proposed for some federal public service workers, and in particular, Performance Pay for the public service executives, and the lack of transparency associated with some of the compensation schemes.
Over the two years, 1997-98 the proposed increase for the judiciary is 10.64%, with an
additional indexation increase in 1998 that will bring the actual increase to at least
12%. Similarly, the military received an increase of about 9.4% over two or three years
depending on their classification. In all cases, these increases are at least more than
double, and often more than three times the rate of inflation. 
The 3.75% increase for the RCMP is, on the surface, more modest, but it contains a promise of more to come, in the form of an increase for 1999, which while unspecified pending the settlement of wage increases for the Alliance and other unionized federal workers, promises to be higher than the 1998 increase. In fact, the government's goal is to make the RCMP at least the second highest paid police force in the country. This would represent a 12.85% increase. Hence, when it comes to the RCMP, the government's commitment to wage increases will continue.
However, these increases pale in comparison to the increases that have been paid to the upper echelons of the executive group. On April 1, 1998, compensation for the executive group was increased by between 4 and 19.35%. The most appalling executive increases are the:
* 17.4% at the minimum level of the EX-1;
* up to 19.35% at the Deputy Minister level; and,
* Performance Pay in general, and more specifically, the newly-opposed 'at risk' system.
Alliance members continue to express their outrage with respect to performance pay and
the new system that the government is implementing on the basis of highly questionable
recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Senior Level Retention and Compensation.
And they have every reason to be upset and angry. No PSAC member, officer or staff person
has seen the data that the Treasury Board President so confidently referred to in his
appearance before the Advisory Committee. And, the Alliance has no way of verifying its
accuracy because the government has refused to release it despite a PSAC Access to
Information request made in March. 
All across the country "Where's OUR Raise?" stickers are appearing in the workplace. Petitions are being drawn up demanding that Treasury Board start negotiating seriously on the wage front by tabling a reasonable pay increase taking into consideration 'catch-up'. This is particularly the case since the government's position of 'no catch-up' is ringing more hollow with each passing announcement of wage increases for other sectors of the public service.
On June 1, the day when raises for the Executive Group came into effect, Alliance members across the country donned their "Where's OUR Raise?" stickers and protested outside their workplaces during their lunch hour.
Alliance members are encouraged to keep up the pressure by writing the Treasury Board President and your Member of Parliament and telling them that Enough is Enough! Collective bargaining is your right and it's time they conducted meaningful negotiations. And keep wearing those "Where's OUR Raise?" stickers. Sooner or later they will get the message.
After eight years of attempting to convince management at the National
Museums to develop job evaluation plans jointly with the union, we finally succeeded
through collective bargaining.
Classification was a top bargaining priority and a strike issue for Museum members. With this membership strength and support, the Alliance successfully negotiated collective agreements that contained provisions for classification grievances, as well as a Memorandum of Understanding to form joint union-management committees to develop job evaluation plans.
The museums were part of the public service until 1990 when four separate crown corporations were created: Canadian Museum of Civilization and War Museum, National Gallery of Canada and the Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography, Canadian Museum of Nature, and National Museum of Science and Technology. Three museums proceeded to develop new classification plans without union involvement. The Alliance assessed these plans and concluded that they were not acceptable, because of a number of inequities and problems.
Donna Naughton, the Local vice-president of the Museum of Nature said that members were not willing to accept the employer's job evaluation plan. It didn't reflect the real values of the institution, or acknowledge and reward the actual work members were doing. "We felt that the plan had gender, pay and job inequities, so we made it a collective bargaining priority. People are much more comfortable now and have more confidence in the process as an equal party," said Naughton.
Bonnie Bates, former National Gallery Local president, said that the classification issue spurred involvement in the Local, because members were being adversely affected by management's actions. "The employer made it clear that they would not negotiate classification issues. As one-quarter of our members stood to go down in pay, it pushed people from having classification as an important issue to a strike issue," said Bates.
Classification also became a strike issue at the Museum of Civilization. "It was something management was imposing on us that didn't reflect the diversity of our work," said Local executive member, Denise Corbett. "Now," she says "with the Memorandum of Understanding, we are at least able to see if the plan can be altered. People are nervous and a bit skeptical, but willing to try."
The Museum of Science and Technology did not attempt to develop a new classification plan. According to Chief Steward Daniel Kinsella, the continued use of the Treasury Board system had no credibility, because of inequities, clear abuses of the system and no appeal process. "We now have strength in being able to participate in the grievance process and classification review committee and members are ready to work with management to have a fair and equitable system," Kinsella added.
(Bonnie Carroll is a PSAC Classification and Equal Pay Officer.)
PSAC members don't have to leave their union behind when they retire from
their jobs. Now there's a group the Association of Public Service Alliance Retirees
(APSAR) just for them. "It took 10 years, but we had a vision", according to
Jeanne Smith, interim president of the Association.
A resolution to establish a group to represent Alliance retirees was first presented to the 1988 PSAC triennial convention. While defeated at that convention, the drive for such an organization persisted until the 1997 PSAC convention approved its creation. A founding conference in December 1997 established an interim executive and constitution. A founding convention is expected sometime in 1999 following a program of membership recruitment. In the meantime, the Association is operating with a start-up grant from the Alliance together with donated furniture and equipment from the Alliance and components. Financial donations have also been received from Locals and individual members.
For its day-to-day operations, APSAR relies on the commitment of its volunteer workers, in particular executive members Smith, Collette Gervais and Lucie Lavergne. Ask these women what it all means and they'll tell you it's exciting. "Members are applying for membership even before they've actually retired. We have the potential to make a difference. Grey and silver power are respected."
These days there are plenty of issues that affect Alliance retirees. APSAR has joined the fight to obtain pay equity for our Treasury Board members and retirees by writing to Treasury Board President Marcel Massé, and all Members of Parliament demanding a quick and fair settlement.
APSAR is also making sure that the concerns of Alliance retirees about the new seniors benefit, changes in the CPP/QPP and the major restructuring of the Public Service Superannuation Plan will be heard.
And APSAR intends to provide whatever support it can to Alliance members in their attempts to negotiate collective agreements. Wage increases now mean better pensions in the future.
For the small sum of $15.00 a year for membership, not only will APSAR members receive a quarterly newsletter, they'll continue to have access to many of the benefits available to them as Alliance members including group life insurance, home and auto insurance, reduced car rental and hotel rates, low interest Mastercard and discount moving rates.
If Jeanne has her way, these won't be the only benefits. "We're currently talking to a number of carriers with a view to negotiating a dental plan. And, we will represent members who encounter pension and disability problems. Having our own retirees' association means that we can officially affiliate with the Canadian Labour Congress' umbrella organization, the Congress of Union Retirees, to work together on common issues."
If you're retiring soon or know someone who is, here's how to get more information and to become an APSAR member. Write to the Association of Public Service Alliance Retirees, Room 1002, 233 Gilmour Street, Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0P2, telephone (613) 560-4206 or send an e-mail to apsar@psac.com. Membership is their strength.
(Louise Laporte is a PSAC Action Program Resource Officer.)
The effect of perfume on sensitized individuals is often much more serious than just a runny nose and a headache. And we must ask if perfume is also a health hazard to the general public? Many researchers now believe it is.
Some provincial governments are adopting policies to limit exposure to the chemicals found in perfumes. Nova Scotia, for example, has already banned artificial scents in most public buildings including the Halifax Law Courts. Just another addition to the scent-free movement that has spread through hospitals, schools, churches and even some restaurants.
But what is all the fuss about? Consider these facts:
* Perfume today is not made from flowers or other natural sources but from toxic chemicals.
* More than 4,000 chemicals are used in fragrances. Of these, 95% are made from petroleum.
* No agency regulates the fragrance industry, yet perfume chemicals are as damaging to health as tobacco smoke.
The chemicals that were synthesized after World War II including, pesticides, synthetic fragrances, cleaning products, detergents, etc., are mostly "petro-chemicals" (petroleum based) and are quite toxic to humans. There have been virtually no studies done on the majority of these chemicals to see how they affect humans. The industry's position is: "they are "safe, till proven toxic", instead of the other way around.
One of the biggest offenders is PERFUME and other scented products. Did you know that many of the ingredients in your perfume are the exact same ingredients found in GASOLINE?! And, the perfume industry is NOT REGULATED at all. They can put any number of chemicals in fragrances without revealing what those chemicals are or how they may affect humans.
So what are the toxic chemicals found in fragrances? Studies have shown the presence of toluene, ethanol, acetone, formaldehyde, limonene, benzene derivatives, ethylene chloride, and many others known to cause cancer, birth defects, infertility, nervous system damage, or other injuries. Toluene was found in every fragrance sample collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a 1991 report. Toluene was most abundant in the auto parts store as well as the fragrance section of the department store. Toluene has been proven to cause cancer and nervous system damage and is designated as hazardous waste.
So a few people might be affected by fragrances. What's the big deal? Again, consider the following facts:
* There is a dramatic increase in people who are made sick by fragrances because so many products are now scented. Babies and children are even more vulnerable, as are people who are trying to recover from cancer and other illnesses.
* Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS) is caused by overexposure to toxic chemicals such as perfumes.
* Asthma is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions in Canada. More than one million Canadians of all ages suffer from asthma, resulting in more than 60,000 hospital admissions and 280,000 days in hospital annually.
* Asthma and asthma-related deaths have increased by over 30% in the past 10 years.
* Three million Canadians suffer from sinusitis.
Some of us can be exposed to toxic chemicals and not present any symptoms. That doesn't mean that these chemicals are inoffensive. It could mean that you just don't feel the effects yet. Your health could still be damaged later in life especially if you continue to be exposed to toxic chemicals.
In an attempt to minimize workplace exposure to perfumes and other scented products, some employers have endorsed workplace policies. To do so is to prevent further contamination of the indoor air and to increase the awareness of workers on the issues of chemical sensitivities and environmental illness.
Just like 20 years ago, it would have been impossible to imagine a total ban on tobacco use in public buildings and in the workplace, many believe exposure to perfumes and scented products will soon encounter the same fate.
The PSAC National Board of Directors, at their May meeting, endorsed an Awareness Kit on Scent-Free Environments as proposed by the PSAC Health and Safety Program. Copies will be available for distribution in early fall.
(Denis St-Jean is a PSAC health and safety officer.)
The PSAC Women's Policy Paper entitled, "Women and the Alliance: From the Margins to the Mainstream" was adopted at the 1994 PSAC Triennial Convention. The paper included several recommendations, one of them being that the Alliance conduct a family care needs survey to help develop solutions to the family care problems of members.
In response to that recommendation, the Family Care Needs Survey was developed and included in the Winter 1996/97 'Alliance'.
A total of 1,137 surveys were completed and returned. Though we had hoped for a higher rate of return, the collected data served to reinforce the Alliance's premise that family care is required by the members.
The survey provided the following results:
* 62.5% indicated they require child care;
* 7.7% have a requirement for elder care;
* 3.4% require care for a person with a disability;
* 73.6% total reported a need for some kind of family care arrangement.
* 29% have an informal care arrangement;
* 22.3% reported having formal care arrangements;
* 20% have their care provided by a family member.
61% of all respondents indicated that a key factor in satisfactory care arrangements of any type, was the trust the member had in the caregiver. This percentage increases to 74% for those who have formal care arrangements.
Members were asked what they least liked about their current family care arrangements. 33.8% reported lack of subsidies as an issue. This was followed closely by the lack of available emergency care (23.7%) and overall rate of fees (21.5%)
In order of response, the members wanted the union to pursue the issue of family care by ensuring that there is:
* improvements to family care provisions
* more workplace daycare
* access to emergency care; and
* subsidies
We thank all those members who participated in the survey. The Alliance will continue to consider the family care needs of our members an important issue and work towards developing policies that will best meet those needs.
The lightstations that tourists are so fond of photographing do more than enhance the rustic scenery. Just ask anyone who has been caught in a boat at sea while a storm was brewing. But more than the lightstation, it is the lightkeeper who is an essential feature of maritime safety in Canada.
But some senior officials in Ottawa failed to understand that. They wanted to de-staff 51 coastal lightstations in Canada. They did not count on the determination of lightkeepers.
"The success of our campaign to keep the lightstations from being de-staffed lay first in the unfailing support of the Alliance and its Union of Canadian Transport Employees (UCTE)," says Margi Blamey, who, at the start of this campaign, headed the Mainland British Columbia Political Action Committee. "PSAC National President Daryl Bean and UCTE President Robert Desfonds released the funds needed to wage this campaign and had complete confidence in us. They approved our objectives and our workplan and let us go to work, supporting us publicly when necessary."
According to Blamey, campaign team members Don Graham, Jim Abram and herself were very familiar with the subject. Blamey and Graham were members of the Political Action Committee, and Abram was president of the PSAC/UCTE Local 20232. "Moreover, with Don and Jim we had excellent strategists and articulate individuals with a vision of what we wanted to accomplish. And despite the bureaucrats' claims, fishers, mariners and marine aviators on the West Coast clearly understand that it is a very dangerous place where conditions can change rapidly, and that only a human presence can truly ensure their safety."
The outcome of the campaign begun in 1994: 27 West Coast lightstations will remain staffed, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans announced recently. And another plus, says Abram, "the government just informed us that it has also decided not to de-staff 24 lightstations on the East Coast. Now we just have to convince the Coast Guard not to install electronic foghorns on the West Coast."
The campaign against the de-staffing of lightstations has been successful because the main issue has always been public safety. "The B.C. coastal community played a role, because they felt that de-staffing truly compromised its safety," explains Blamey. Jim Abram also believes that safety was a primary consideration, "but as the campaign progressed, people also started to understand that Ottawa's decision would have a definite economic impact. Several towns along the West Coast have been affected by the problems in the forestry industry as well as fisheries. In all, 102 jobs in the 51 Canadian lightstations will be saved, and that's something," concludes Abram.
When 30 million loonies are invested in a venture, it means things are going well. And when that $30 million investment represents about 30 new Alliance members, it means things are going even better!
The Royal Canadian Mint is setting up a new coin-plating facility near the existing Mint operation in Winnipeg, which employs some 150 Alliance members. But for Alain Séguier, Regional Vice-President of the PSAC's Supply and Services Union, this good performance is owed largely to the many contracts the Mint has obtained. "We have landed quite a number of small contracts, allowing us to optimize our production capacity. We can now look to the future with greater confidence."
According to Séguier, the number of new jobs created should be about 30, since, despite its considerable capacity, the new facility will be highly automated. Once the new plant is in operation, in two years, the Mint will be able to manufacture coins using less expensive materials, applying nickel plating at the end of the production cycle. This process is already being used to produce the one- and two-dollar coins. Once nickels, dimes, quarters and 50-cent pieces are produced in this way, the annual savings will be about $9.5 million.
The WIGTs are in and the testing has begun. What is a WIGT and what testing
are you talking about?, you might well ask. The WIGT or Work Information Gathering Tool
is the questionnaire used to collect information from real people about real work in
the federal public service. The testing is the trial application of the Universal
Classification Standard (UCS) against the 325 questionnaires that were collected last
fall.
To conduct the testing, 17 pairs of 'fresh eyes' were brought together in Ottawa by the Treasury Board from February 2 to 20, 1998 to see if the jobs described in the WIGTs could be rated using the UCS. On each of the three 'fresh eyes' teams, two of which worked in English and the other in French, there was one Alliance representative: Hilary Perrott of Ottawa on Team 3, Chuck Davis of Sault Ste. Marie on Team 2 and myself on Team 1.
From the start, it was obvious that the UCS, still in draft form only, needs more work. At the beginning of the three-week exercise, our comments were of a general nature. The very fact that the UCS is intended to replace some 70 different classification standards, from Clerks (CR) to Computer Science (CS), means that it contains a tremendous amount of information. Another stated goal of the UCS is to look at work in a new way and thereby uncover work that has been traditionally hidden.
As a result, included in the Standard are elements such as 'Psychological/Emotional Effort', 'Focused Attention', 'Physical Working Conditions' and 'Psychological Working Conditions'. In other words, there is a lot of material in the Standard to absorb and, since many of the concepts are new, our comments during the first week centered on whether or not the elements and their descriptions made sense. In many cases, they did not and the teams said so in both their group discussions and individual written reports.
As time went on, however, we became more familiar with the Standard and were able to provide the Treasury Board design team with more detailed comments. We found, for example, that some of the elements, such as Job Content Knowledge, contained terms which were not defined and were therefore subject to individual interpretations and inconsistent ratings. In other elements, the degrees seemed to overlap, thereby making it difficult to choose one particular degree over another. Sometimes there was no degree that could be applied to a particular job. The rating scale for the element, Information for the Use of Others, for instance, makes no reference to "providing expert advice", a requirement of many public service jobs. Some definitions, such as the one for "product" in the Physical Resources and Products element, were so restrictive that some of the things produced by federal public service workers were overlooked a plaster cast or the design of a web page, for example.
Our task, as 'fresh eyes' testers, was to read and apply the UCS to the majority of Sample II WIGTs and to provide feedback for the purposes of clarifying the UCS concepts and grids as well as identifying possible 'overlaps and gaps that may exist'. Whether we were there as representatives of the union or the public service, we all took our job very seriously and provided our feedback in the sincere belief that doing so would contribute to the completion of a classification plan that is simple, universal and gender-neutral. Although we did not quite meet the first objective, we certainly surpassed Treasury Board's expectations regarding the second. As one of the design team members put it: "There was not one element that we left untouched".
While, in the short run, our work may result in a delay in the implementation of the UCS, we believe that, in the long run, it will be worth it. After all, if you set about to change something as complex as the current classification system, you may as well take the time to do it right. The UCS is headed in the right direction there are just a few cracks in the pavement that need to be fixed before it can be fully implemented.
The Alliance remains committed to monitoring the project and providing input to the Treasury Board throughout the process. As they have been in the past, members will continue to be asked for their help, either by volunteering to participate in a working group such as 'fresh eyes' or by assisting in the training of other members. Preparations are already in the works at the Alliance for the development of a UCS training module which will be offered to PSAC members. We hope to have it ready by September when it is expected that most departments will be revising work descriptions in a new format to be specially designed for the UCS.
If you are interested in getting involved, let your Regional Office know...so that when the call goes out, we'll all be ready. After all, your pay depends on it!
(Elizabeth Holden is a services officer with the PSAC National Component and is currently working in the PSAC Equal Pay and Classification Section.)
What happens when the - Author: Peggy O'Brien, Supply & Services Union Local 60018, Shediac, N.B.
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which began its hearings into the PSAC's federal pay equity complaint in 1991, heard evidence from the Alliance, Treasury Board and the Human Rights Commission through 295 days of hearings and concluded its hearings in January 1997, has finally announced that its decision will be released in July of this year.
Who knew 14 years ago what a long road lay ahead? Who would have guessed that a pay equity complaint filed in 1984 on behalf on federal public service clerks would mushroom into a dispute involving almost 200,000 current and former federal government workers and result in the largest decision of its kind to date?
Now that the decision is imminent, what can Alliance members expect after all the months and years of waiting? The Tribunal decision will deal with the issues which were presented to them during the hearings. Here are brief descriptions of these issues.
The actual methodology to be used to calculate the wage gap. In 1996 the Tribunal ruled that the results of the joint union/management equal pay study were reliable and could be used to calculate a wage gap. However, there are a number of ways in which these calculations can be done. The PSAC and the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) both proposed methods of calculation using all the data in the joint study. Treasury Board, on the other hand, suggested different methods, none of which would use all of the data. In other words, Treasury Board wanted to be able to pick and choose the data which would suit their purposes. The Alliance's method was the one agreed to by the unions and by Treasury Board at the start of the joint study.
The groups and levels eligible to receive adjustments. Once the Tribunal describes the method of calculating the wage gap, we will know which groups and levels will be eligible to receive adjustments. According to the PSAC's calculations, there should be adjustments to most of the groups and levels.
To what date the payments should be retroactive. The Alliance has asked that, in accordance with the practice of other Canadian Human Rights Tribunals, payments should be retroactive to one year before the filing of the complaint. This would be 1983 in the case of the CRs (the original complaint was filed in 1984) and 1984 for the other groups (one year before the joint study was announced.)
Whether simple or compound interest should be paid and what the interest rate should be. In spite of the fact that the government has refused to consider including interest as part of the offers made to the Alliance last year, Treasury Board representatives argued for simple interest before the Tribunal. The Alliance put forward its case in support of compound interest.
Whether any damages should be paid. At the time the PSAC complaint was heard, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) provided for the payment of up to $5,000, tax-free, for damages as part of the remedy for human rights complaints. (Recent changes to the CHRA have increased the maximum amount of damages to $20,000.) The Alliance argued that an award of damages would compensate PSAC members for the many lost opportunities they've suffered because they weren't being paid properly. The opportunities to use these funds for particular needs over the past 14 years can never be recovered.
Whether any party should receive all or part of their legal costs. The Alliance has asked for reimbursement of part of our legal costs, because we believe that Treasury Board dragged out this case far longer than was reasonable.
Once the Tribunal's decision is released, the Alliance and Treasury Board will meet to work out how the decision will be applied and when the cheques will be issued. What details may need to be worked out will depend on the content of the Tribunal's decision. Nevertheless, the Tribunal's decision is binding. And, if need be, the decision can be enforced by the Federal Court.
Any of the parties (the Alliance, the Treasury Board or the Canadian Human Rights Commission) may appeal the decision if there is an error in fact or in law in the Tribunal's decision. The parties have 30 days in which to appeal. The appeal process does not stop the Tribunal's decision from being applied unless the Federal Court can be convinced otherwise. However, the Court will not agree to stop any payments just because the government doesn't like the Tribunal's decision. Should Treasury Board appeal, the Alliance will take all appropriate steps to oppose the appeal and to enforce the Tribunal decision.
There is no deadline for the cheques to be issued. Treasury Board has indicated that they believe it will be possible to issue cheques to current employees within 90 days. The first change should be to the regular pay cheques. Once the new rates start being paid, the retroactivity can be calculated.
Current employees in the six affected bargaining groups won't be the only people affected by the Tribunal's decision. Current employees who were in one or more of the affected groups during the retroactive period should receive their retroactive pay automatically. Former employees who are receiving a federal pension cheque will automatically receive their retroactivity as well as a recalculation of their monthly pension benefit.
If you know of anyone who was in one of the affected groups who has left the government but is not receiving a federal pension cheque, please pass along the following information. They will need to do one of two things to claim their retroactive pay. They can contact the personnel office of their last department. Or, they can advise the Human Resources Division, Corporate Services Branch, Treasury Board, 300 Laurier Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R5. The telephone number is (613) 992-1996. However it is best to put any request for retroactive payments in writing and to keep a copy of this request.
Special credit card program for PSAC members. Reduced interest rate, credit card registration, comprehensive travel protection, and skip payment privilege. Application forms available from PSAC regional offices.
Save money with Trafalgar Insurance. Fast service, very competitive rates, satisfactory claims settlement and convenient monthly payments without interest charges.
For full information or a quotation please call:
British Columbia: Toll free 1-800-263-6946 local (604) 266-1223
Alberta, Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories: Toll free 1-800-661-1233 local (403) 263-6424
Ontario: Toll free 1-800-668-0250 local (416) 961-7555
Montreal (Quebec): Toll free 1-800-361-3608 local (514) 967-7555
Quebec (Quebec): Toll free 1-800-554-4344 local (418) 622-7799
Atlantic Provinces: Toll free 1-800-565-1608 local (902) 429-7722
Manitoba, Saskatchewan: Toll free 1-800-387-5601; call collect (416) 961-5013
National Capital Region:
Ottawa, Ontario: (613) 748-1918; Internet address: http://www.groulxins.com
Hull (Quebec), Place du Centre: (819) 595-0048
(British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have their own government operated automobile insurance plan)
Coverage available for all qualifying members and their immediate families. For information and/or application card: Coughlin and Associates, PSAC Insurance Trust, P.O. Box 3518, Station C, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4H5, telephone (613) 231-2266.
Need a car for business or pleasure? Call BUDGET. Simply present your PSAC membership card at time of rental.
Delta Hotels across Canada offer special rates to PSAC members. Upon registration simply present your PSAC membership card.
Consider Allied Pickfords Call 1-800-668-9346 for details.
Membership number must be given at time of call. 12% discount on local moves - 42% discount on long distance moves. Seasonal rates and some restrictions to apply.