FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 17, 2001

Women and unions launch second charter challenge against Ontario government for denying women $140 million in pay equity adjustments

TORONTO  - "Today, on the 16th anniversary of the Charter, a legal action has been launched against the Ontario Government for once again violating the pay equity rights of women in public sector predominantly female workplaces" says Mary Cornish, lawyer for the five union and four individual women applicants.

 "We will argue in Court that the government is knowingly perpetuating sex discrimination and the undervaluation of women's work when it funds public services at discriminatory wages contrary to s.15 of the Charter." 

The action in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice seeks an order that the government must fund over $140 million in pay equity adjustments owing under the Pay Equity Act from 1999 to date and continue funding until pay equity is achieved which is expected to take at least 10 more years. 

These women have received only one third of their pay equity adjustment to date while other public sector women were funded to achieve full pay equity in 1998.

The unions are the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the Ontario Nurses' Association, the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, the Service Employees International Union and the United Steelworkers of America. The individual applicants are a registered nurse, a health care aide, a child care worker and a developmental services worker. The unions represent over 44,000 of the 100,000 workers in these public sector workplaces which includes nursing homes, child care centres, services for the disabled, shelters and home care agencies. 

"These skilled workers are amongst the lowest paid in the public sector and yet they are the frontline workers delivering the Ontario government's health and social services across Ontario" says Judy Darcy, National President of CUPE. "The Harris government is trying to cheat these women out of their right to non-discriminatory wages for work comparable to other male publicly funded work. 

In 1997, Mr. Justice O'Leary in SEIU Local 204 v. Attorney-General(Ont) ruled that the Tories 1995 law which eliminated pay equity for women in predominantly female workplaces was unconstitutional and discriminatory. "The Harris government is deliberately flouting the ruling in our successful Court challenge. We will fight on to make sure that our members' rights are protected against government discrimination" says Sharleen Stewart, International Canadian Vice-President of SEIU. 

The government knows that these women will never achieve pay equity unless targeted pay equity funds flow to these employers, who in the words of Mr. Justice O'Leary "..depend on government funding for their very existence. Any increase in pay must be paid for by the government." Many of these community agencies would like to pay their workers equitable wages but can't absorb the extra costs within the restrictions of their government controlled budgets. As a result, these women are falling even further behind with their wage gap increasing as other workers in the public sector receive normal wage increases. 

"Women and unions are coming together to legally challenge this arrogant government attitude which shows such disdain for the work women do in caring for and supporting Ontario's citizens." says Leah Casselman, President, Ontario Public Service Employees Union. This important health and social services sector is also losing workers to other sectors because of its discriminatory wages and the lack of recognition for the value of the "women's work" which is performed. 

"Winning this challenge would mean nurses are valued for the work they do and this is the best way of addressing the growing nursing shortage in Ontario which is threatening our public health system" says Barb Wahl, ONA President. 

The government broke its promise made when it decided not to appeal the SEIU decision. Ernie Eves said that the government would "make sure the broader public sector employers..have the ability to live up to and fund the decision." (Oct.7/97). Instead, after a long delay the Government paid out the adjustments owing up from 1994 to 1998 and then told its service providers that pay equity was the "cost of doing business" and they were on their own to pay for it.

"Yet it is the 'government's business" that these workers are carrying out and all employers performing public services should be funded for equitable wages. This is the cost of being a government" says Harry Hynd, National Director, USWA District 6. 

Participating groups: 

Canadian Union of Public Employees 
Ontario Nurses' Association 
Ontario Public Service Employees Union 
Service Employees International Union
United Steelworkers of America 

Pay Equity Denied by Ontario Government Download chart (on the left) .pdf format

PROXY PAY EQUITY -BACKGROUNDER

1988 Pay Equity Act comes into effect. 

The government recognizes that the job-to-job comparison method cannot be implemented in predominantly female workplaces (e.g. child care centres) where there are insufficient male job classes for women to compare their wages to. Yet it is predominantly female workplaces where wages are the lowest because the work is seen as "women's work". To remedy this, the Act requires a report on wage discrimination in these workplaces to develop an appropriate new comparison method. 

1989 Pay Equity Commission Report recommends two new comparison methods: 

Proportional: Where there are a small number of male job classes in a workplace, value can be assigned to the work performed by those classes, allowing women to identify the appropriate wage rate they should receive for the work they do. 

Proxy: In workplaces with fewer or no male job classes, a similar larger workplace nearby is used as a "proxy" comparator, because that workplace has already identified the wage gap between men and women using the job-to-job method. Eg. a nurse at a nursing home can be compared to a nurse at a municipal home for the aged. 

1990 Start date for pay equity for the job to job method. 

Minister of Labour, Bob McKenzie announces the intention to implement proportional and proxy comparison methods for women in predominantly female workplaces and to fund all public sector pay equity adjustments. 

1991 Treasurer, Floyd Laughren commits to fully funding public sector pay equity. 

Amount to total $1 billion annually at maturity. Chair of Management Board of Cabinet also commits to 100% funding for proxy sector noting that pay equity is a right not a luxury and that recessions hit lowest paid workers the hardest. 

1993 Bill 102 is passed, legislating proportional and proxy pay equity. 

Minister of Labour again commits to providing full funding for pay equity adjustments. Ontario issues Pay Equity Funding Guidelines and reiterates commitment to 100% fund proxy pay equity. Ontario will fund 3% of payroll in first year and 1% for each following year until pay equity is achieved. 

1994 Proxy pay equity adjustments start date. 

Predominantly female workplaces begin using proxy comparators to identify the discriminatory wage gaps between workers in comparable male and female job classes. Unions and employers begin preparing "proxy plans". 

1995 Harris elected. 

Tories cap public sector pay equity funding at $500 million annually as follows: 

Ontario Public Service $ 120 million 
Workplaces using Job-to-Job and Proportional Method 249 million
Proxy Workplaces (3% of employer's payroll) 62 million 
Pay Equity Downpayment Program 50 million 
Special (eg. Homemaker wage rate reform) 19 million ------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Total $ 500 million

Ontario introduces Schedule J to Bill 26 - Savings and Restructuring Act, 1995 amending the Pay Equity Act. Schedule J abolishes the proxy method of comparison and eliminates the obligation for proxy workplaces to pay further adjustments above the cap 3% of payroll.

1996 Schedule J passed - Proxy Comparison method abolished, funding capped. 

Charter Challenge - SEIU Local 204 and two women launch a challenge of Schedule J. 

1997 Government defends the challenge, stating the proxy method did not identify pay discrimination and was too expensive to fund. 

The government had therefore taken away proxy employers' legal obligations to pay further pay equity adjustments. 

Mr. Justice O'Leary rules in SEIU Local 204 v. Attorney General (Ont). Finds Schedule J violates section 15 of the Charter in that it discriminates against women in proxy sector workplaces, the women who's wages are most discriminatory as compared to men. 

Harris states Ontario will "honour and support our pay equity commitments". Ernie Eves announces Ontario will not appeal the decision and will make sure proxy employers "not only obey the decision but have the ability to live up to and fund the decision". 

Ernie Eves announces: $140 million in retroactive proxy pay equity funding. Funding to be paid on a one time basis to cover proxy pay equity adjustments owing for 1995, 1996 and 1997. 500 million cap still in place. $500 million cap for pay equity for all public sector employees, including proxy workplaces, is still in place. Employers and employees asked to agree on a fair distribution of the annual capped pay equity funding. 

1998 Pay Equity Commission advises employers that proxy is reinstated and they must make annual 1% of payroll adjustments until pay equity is achieved. Public sector employers using job-to-job and proportional to achieve pay equity achieve pay equity Jan.1.

KPMG is retained by Government to consult with public sector employers and employees on how to divide $500 million. KPMG reports unanimous message: Government must fully fund pay equity adjustments for all public sector women regardless of the method of comparison. Pay equity is not possible without funding. Government refuses to release the report. 

1999 Annual proxy pay equity adjustments not paid. 

Government pays retroactive adjustments owing up to January 1, 1998, and advises employers that they are responsible for all further annual adjustments required by the Act. 

Employers, unions and the Equal Pay Coalition lobby Government to abide by SEIU 204 decision and fully fund proxy pay equity. Minister of Finance replies: pay equity is "part of the cost of doing business", proxy employers "are responsible for meeting their current and future obligations". 

2000 Annual proxy pay equity adjustments not paid. 

Government tells proxy employers they must find funds for pay equity within their existing budgets. Pay Equity Commission tells proxy employers that layoffs, reducing hours of work, or eliminating positions in order to find money for pay equity adjustments may violate the Pay Equity Act. 

Ministry of Labour 2000-2001 Business Plan states that one of its core businesses is ensuring enforcement of the Pay Equity Act and a target is increasing rates of compliance with the Act by 20% over the next 5 years. 

Proxy employers and organizations write continuously to the Ministry requesting pay equity funding, stating that they cannot continue to provide necessary public services and meet their obligations under the Pay Equity Act without adequate funding. Ministries continue to refuse further funding. 

Government releases Budget trumpeting a booming economy, a balanced budget achieved one year early, an over-achievement in the deficit reduction target, the Contingency Reserve Fund doubled to $1 billion, while generating necessary revenues "to pay for valued public services". At same time as as government trumpets the strength of the economy it is saying no to paying women performing public services equitable wages. 

Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal issues decision in Kensington Village Nursing Home v. SEIU Local 220. Tribunal states lack of government funding is not a defence to a proxy employer's failure to provide pay equity adjustments. 

Third Quarter figures issued by Government note projected 2000-2001 surplus of $1,411 million, up $45 million. 

2001 Annual proxy pay equity adjustments not paid. 

Total owing now to women of $140 million. Charter challenge filed by CUPE, ONA, OPSEU, SEIU, USWA and 4 female applicants. Applicants ask the Court to order the government to provide the funds needed for pay equity. 

2014 Government estimate of the year in which women in the proxy sector would achieve pay equity if payments of 1% payroll were made according to the Pay Equity Act. The annual mature cost of proxy pay equity by this date is at estimated at $484 million annually. 

WOMEN IN PREDOMINANTLY FEMALE WORKPLACES - THE PROXY SECTOR 

The Proxy Sector 
Predominantly female public sector workplaces where there are few or no male job classes. These workplaces use the proxy method of comparison to identify the wage adjustments needed for female job classes in order to allow them to achieve pay equity.

Government Services 
Proxy Sector workplaces provide vital public services to those most in need. For eg. - child care centres, - nursing homes caring for the aged, - associations for community living working with the developmentally disabled, - home care agencies - children's aid societies, - women's shelters and rape crisis centres, - and many more. 

Women Service Providers 
The staff at these workplaces are overwhelmingly women. For example, 98% of the staff in child care centres are women. 88% of nurses aides are women. 

Lowest Paid Workers in the Public Sector 
Women in the proxy sector receive discriminatory wages which make them amongst the lowest paid in the public sector. For example, in 1998, assistant teachers in child care centres were paid on average less than $20,000 per year, less than the average wage of a parking attendant. 

Women's Work
This work is low paid because women do it and this work is most associated with the caring and support functions of classic women's work. They are perceived as caregivers who nurse the ill, clean, cook, and perform other female tasks, which are vitally important to Ontario citizens but which have been undervalued comparable to tasks performed by men. The high levels of skill, education, responsibility, and the high demands of their work has often been ignored or minimized. For example, child care workers in provincially regulated child care centres must hold an Early Childhood Education Diploma, a two year program. Although not required, 50% of women working as counsellors in group homes for the developmentally disabled have completed course work on working with people with developmental disabilities. The Pay Equity Act was passed with the goal of remedying this gender based discrimination.

 -30-