I can just speak almost to a technical sense on that, which is that because the employer has an awful lot of power, in this case, and because when you're looking at the legislation, we're not clear on what job group is or what job class is, for bringing forward the 70% predominance of female-dominated groups, right now we have no idea if a system can be put in place or may be put in place so that no group will actually reach a female-dominated 70% job group or job class.
It may be all irrelevant. The employer has the control over that. In essence, they could create a system such that there would be no pay equity even though groups may have come in at 69%. Clearly there's a pay equity problem, but they will not be addressed in this legislation. Or we would have groups that are at 55% under the Canadian Human Rights Act and there is a clear pay equity problem, but they will not be addressed in this legislation.
Depending on how Treasury Board and the government determine how those job classes get defined in the regulations, it is very unclear at this point as to whether they can just legislate themselves or regulate themselves out of ever having to deal with this.