No. 22

July 31, 1998

IT'S OUR VICTORY!!!!!!

It all started with a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission 14 years ago. It's been a long wait but all the hard work and dedication of Alliance members, elected officers, staff and legal counsel have finally paid off.

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal which heard the PSAC's pay equity complaint has agreed with us. The federal government is in violation of its own law, section 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Women and men in the female-dominated groups are not receiving equal pay for work of equal value.

Methodology

The wage gap will be calculated using the Canadian Human Rights Commission's methodology. The Tribunal was very critical of the Treasury Board methodology and also rejected their attempts to challenge the Pay Equity Guidelines flowing from the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal found the Alliance's methodology acceptable but preferred the Commission's.

The Commission's methodology is very close to the PSAC's and represents about 90% overall of the PSAC's calculations. However, members should be cautioned against taking 90% of the amount of the PSAC calculations printed in earlier bulletins as an estimate of what they are owed. While the methodologies are close in terms of overall results, the CHRC's methodology is different from the Alliance's. In addition, the retroactive period determined by the Tribunal is somewhat shorter than the time period used by the Alliance in its calculations.

The Tribunal made an important point with regard to the methodology. They rejected Treasury Board's argument which said that for the purposes of calculating the wage gap, only the lowest male rates of pay should be used. The Tribunal said that the average of male rates of pay should be used. This is an important decision and a precedent for future pay equity cases.

The equalization payments shall be calculated using the 1987-88 job evaluation data from the Joint Union Management pay equity study and the contemporary wage rates for the applicable fiscal year. This means that using the study data, the wage gap will be calculated for each year back to 1985 using the actual wage rates in effect in each of these years. This is another important decision. Treasury Board had tried to convince the Tribunal to calculate the wage gap only once, in 1987, and then ignore all the increases in the male groups after that year. After 1987 there were large wage increases in a number of the male groups including the Ships' Crews (SC), the Engineering and Scientific Support (EG) and Financial Administration (FI) groups. Treasury Board's position would have perpetuated the wage gap. The Tribunal was not convinced.

Retroactivity

The wage adjustment will be calculated retroactively to March 8, 1985. This was the date on which the joint union management equal pay study was announced. While the adjustments will not go as far back as we had requested, the Tribunal's decision is much better than Treasury Board's position of April 1, 1987.

Previous pay equity adjustments

The total payout for each group will be reduced by the amount of the payments made by the Treasury Board in January 1990 and any other pay equity adjustments that are in effect.

Payment of Interest

The Tribunal has ordered the payment of interest for each year retroactive to 1985. The rate will be based on the Canada Savings Bond (CSB) rate of interest in effect on March 1 of each year that a wage adjustment is calculated. It will be paid on the net amount of direct wages owing for each year of the retroactive period. The interest will continue to accumulate until the payments are made.

The Tribunal's decision to award interest, and substantial interest not just a token amount, is also an important precedent.

More information on the CSB rates will be provided in a future bulletin.

Adjustments to be folded-in to salaries

The Tribunal has ordered that the ongoing pay equity adjustments will be folded in and become an integral part of wages effective July 29, 1998.

This will provide a major benefit to our members. As of July 29, pay equity monies will not be treated as something special. Economic increases will be on all the pay members receive, not just a portion. It will have an impact on benefits and allowances received by our members, e.g. overtime, not just on pensions. In addition, having this money included in salary will also be of benefit when the Universal Classification System conversion takes place.

How much is the decision worth?

Based on what we know about the Commission's methodology and the fact that interest has been ordered, we can say that the decision is worth considerably more than Treasury Board's last offer. It will take several weeks at least for the union to perform the numerous calculations required to identify what is owed for each group and level.

Members interested in finding out what steps are being taken by the government to make the calculations and get the payments issued are encouraged to contact the staff in their Human Resources section. At this time pay and benefits clerks will NOT have the information.

Groups included in the decision

The Tribunal decision applies to current and former employees in the Clerical and Regulatory (CR) group, Secretarial, Stenographic and Typing (ST) group, the Educational Support (EU) group, the Hospital Services (HS) group, and the Library Science (LS) group. The Tribunal split the Data Processing (DA) group, saying that wage adjustments will only be calculated for the DA-CON sub-group.

Time Frame

The Tribunal has given the government and the union one year from July 29, 1998 to agree upon the amounts of the payout. However, this does not mean that Treasury Board will be allowed to wait until 364 days have passed to start working on the calculations. As soon as the Alliance has calculated what is owed using the Commission's methodology, we will be putting the pressure on Treasury Board to meet to discuss the amounts owed.

The next steps

The Alliance has called on Treasury Board to sit down and start work on the implementation of the decision immediately. A letter was sent by fax to Peter Harder, Secretary of the Treasury Board, on July 29^th.

All parties have 30 calendar days from the day of the decision to appeal. The Alliance has asked the government to implement the decision. In a news release issued on the day of the decision the Canadian Human Rights Commission also welcomed the decision and called upon the government to take prompt action to ensure its implementation. At the time of writing, Treasury Board had only indicated that they were studying the decision.

As indicated in earlier bulletins, the filing of an appeal does not automatically stop the implementation of the decision. The government would have to ask the Federal Court to stay the decision until the appeal process is completed. The Alliance would fight any attempt on their part to do so.

During this 30 day period, it's critical that Alliance members and former members contact their Member of Parliament as soon as possible to discourage the government from proceeding with an appeal. You can write a letter, send a fax or an e-mail or make a personal visit. Better yet, do all of these and encourage your families, friends and co-workers to join you. With the House in recess, MPs should be in their ridings.

Our message to the MPs is:

• The Tribunal decision is clear - there is a wage gap, which is contrary to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and the time is long overdue for the government to live up to its law.
• If the amount seems large, it's the fault of the government because it has delayed taking the necessary action for so long.
• The decision affects a large number of current and former employees. Not only will a good portion of the monies owed be returned to the government in direct and indirect taxes, the monies actually received by these employees will, for the most part, go directly into the community and benefit local businesses.
• The government has had no trouble finding money for large salary increases and bonuses for its senior executives (the vast majority of whom are men) who are making in excess of $100,000 a year.
• Many of the people affected by this decision are retirees. Their average pension is barely $10,000 a year. The money owed to them will help make a difference in their lives.
• According to Treasury Board, cost is not an issue. Before the Tribunal, in answer to the Alliance's lawyer's criticism that the employer did not provide evidence of the cost of its methodology, the Justice lawyer representing Treasury Board stated: "The reason the employer didn't bring that kind of evidence is that it is our submission that the cost is not relevant to deciding the principles in this case. The interpretation must be decided based on the principle alone, not on how much it would cost".