Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.
We support a pay equity model with a proactive framework and a pre-emptive resolution mechanism, such as a requirement to create a pay equity committee in the workplace comprising bargaining agents, employees, employers, and experts and advisers. Joint accountability on pay equity through a pay equity committee is needed to oblige both parties to conduct their assessments in a collaborative and transparent manner. A requirement for ongoing information sharing needs to occur.
When disagreement occurs, a framework that provides and facilitates alternative dispute resolution mechanisms is also required. This would also create an avenue for parties to resolve their disagreements voluntarily through alternative means, such as mediation, conciliation, facilitated discussions, negotiations, and combined mediation-adjudication, for example.
It should be noted that the idea of informal conflict resolution in pay equity is not new. Conciliation and mediation services are available at the Canadian Human Rights Commission and in provincial jurisdictions. These have proven to be successful in preventing long, drawn-out, and costly litigation battles. The ACFO welcomes the use of an ADR model, both in the investigation and throughout the adjudication process.
Once a complaint is referred to a pay equity tribunal or body, we propose the additional availability of a dual-track system, with complex-track and fast-track mechanisms, depending on the nature of the case or issue in dispute and subject to strict procedural time limits in order to reduce the delays. A fast-track mechanism could also be a voluntary venue for final determination when other forms of ADR have led to an impasse.
Voluntarily choosing an expedited hearing in which a neutral third party could make a final and binding decision could also be an option. The nominee would be selected jointly through a roster of qualified and accredited pay equity experts or could even be assigned by the tribunal. Alternatively, only the portions of the dispute creating the impasse could be referred to the neutral third party.
There are many options here. The key is not closing the door on any of them prematurely. A fast-track mechanism that binds the parties and settles the complaint partially or fully would be optimal to counter the long, drawn-out litigation often seen in past and current complaints.
Our written submission contains more recommendations. We hope you’ll give them careful consideration as well, but we really wanted to stress the importance of the approach to dispute resolution.
Thank you for your time. We’re happy to answer any questions you may have.