HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnion 24-10-21IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION brought pursuant to the Ontario Labour Relations Act,
1995, as amended,
(Grievance #2023-0448-0005)
BETWEEN:
PATHWAYS TO INDEPENDENCE
(the “Employer”)
- and -
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION/SYNDICAT DES EMPLOYÉS DE LA FONCTION
PUBLIQUE DE L’ONTARIO, LOCAL 448
(the “Union”)
AWARD
Arbitrator: Marilyn A. Nairn
Hearing held (by videoconference): October 8, 2024
APPEARANCES
For the Employer: Colin Youngman
For the Union: Emily Cumbaa
1
AWARD
[1] This grievance alleges that severance pay, payable pursuant to Article 45 of the collective
agreement between the parties, should be calculated as including the $3.00/hour permanent
wage enhancement provided to eligible employees pursuant to the Supporting Retention in
Public Services Act, 2022 (“SRPSA”).
[2] The parties filed an Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) with accompanying documentary
materials. No further evidence was called. There is no dispute as to my jurisdiction to hear and
determine the grievance. The ASF provides:
THE PARTIES AND GRIEVANCE
1. The Employer is a non-profit developmental services organization that has congregate
care settings and provides supports to individuals in and around Belleville and Ottawa.
2. The Union is the exclusive bargaining agent for all full-time and part-time employees
save and except supervisors and persons above the rank of supervisors and students
employed during a regular vacation period.
3. The Union and Employer are parties to a collective agreement. A copy of the Collective
Agreement, with a term from April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2024, is appended hereto at
Tab 1.
a) Article 3 of the Collective Agreement addresses management rights.
b) Article 5 of the Collective Agreement addresses pay administration.
c) Article 45 of the Collective Agreement addresses severance payments.
d) Classification and wages are set out in a grid within “Appendix A” of the Collective
Agreement.
e) The Collective Agreement also includes Letter of Understanding #5: Wage Increases,
which provides as follows:
Should the Ministry, prior to March 31, 2024, provide additional funding which, as
a condition of receiving the funding, is required to be paid as wage increases, the
parties agree to meet within thirty (30) days solely for the purpose of negotiating
an increase to wages. The parties undertake to negotiate in good faith and shall
make every reasonable effort to reach a settlement.
4. The Union filed grievance #2023-0448-0005, dated April 27, 2023, alleging that the
Employer has failed to properly pay severance payments following the implementation
2
of the permanent wage enhancement. A copy of that grievance is appended hereto at
Tab 2.
5. The grievance was referred to arbitration and Arbitrator Marilyn Nairn was appointed
to hear the grievance. The parties agree that there is no objection to Arbitrator Nairn’s
jurisdiction to hear and determine the grievance.
ISSUE
6. The parties agree that the issue to be determined is whether the permanent
compensation enhancement should be included in the calculation of severance
payments.
FACTS
7. In April 2020, the Government of Ontario announced a Temporary Pandemic Pay
Program for eligible frontline workers in eligible workplaces. Effective April 21, 2020,
direct support workers in social services were eligible for a temporary pandemic pay of
up to $4.00 per hour in addition to their regular wages. This program was implemented
pursuant to Ontario Regulation 241/20.
8. In October 2020, the Government of Ontario announced a Temporary Wage
Enhancement Program for personal support workers and direct support workers in
home and community care, long-term care, hospital, and social services. Eligible workers
in eligible workplaces would receive a temporary wage increase of up to $3.00 per hour
in addition to their regular wages. This program began October 1, 2020 and was
extended to bridge into the permanent wage enhancement.
9. The Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services (“MCCSS”) issued guidelines for
the administration of the program. These guidelines were updated from time to time.
10. In April 2022, the Government of Ontario implemented a Permanent Compensation
Enhancement Program pursuant to the Supporting Retention in Public Services Act,
2022, S.O. 2022, c. 11, Sched. 7. Like the temporary wage enhancement program, the
permanent wage enhancement program granted eligible employees in home and
community care, long-term care, hospital, and social services a wage enhancement of
up to $3.00 per hour. A copy of the Act, effective April 14, 2022, is appended hereto at
Tab 3.
11. Effective April 21, 2022, Ontario Regulation 413/22 references the document “Personal
Support Workers and Direct Support Workers Permanent Compensation Enhancement
Program”, which sets out the eligibility requirements. The MCCSS issued guidelines for
the administration of the program. These guidelines are updated from time to time. A
3
copy of the Regulation, effective April 21, 2022, is appended hereto at Tab 4 and a copy
of the Guidelines, as updated on November 4, 2022, is appended hereto at Tab 5.
12. In addition, the MCCSS also issued Guidelines for the Administration of the Personal
Support Workers and Direct Support Workers Permanent Compensation Enhancement
Program. These Administrative Guidelines provide that Employers are reimbursed for
the increases in costs associated with the compensation enhancement. Pathways has
not requested or been reimbursed for costs associated with severance payments under
Article 45 of the Collective Agreement. A copy of the Administration Guidelines is
appended hereto at Tab 6.
13. On November 18, 2022, the parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding regarding
the permanent wage enhancement program. The Memorandum sets out the eligible job
classifications and application of the program and provided for payment retroactive to
April 21, 2022. A copy of that Memorandum is appended hereto at Tab 7.
14. Since the parties signed the Memorandum of Understanding, approximately 14
individuals who occupied eligible job classifications have ceased to be employees. The
Employer has not included the $3 per hour permanent wage enhancement in the
calculation of severance payments for those individuals, instead using their hourly wage
rate in “Appendix A” of the Collective Agreement.
15. On April 27, 2023, the Union filed grievance #2023-0448-0005. The parties had a step
meeting on June 15, 2023. On July 24, 2023, the Employer denied the grievance, finding
there was no breach of the Collective Agreement or any other applicable legislation.
[3] The Supporting Retention in Public Services Act, 2022 provides, inter alia:
Funding
2 (1) For the purpose of supporting the provision of public services, a Minister may provide
funding for employers to enhance the compensation paid to employees of the employer.
Use of Funding
4 (1) Funding received by an employer under this Act shall be used to enhance the
compensation paid to employees of the employer in accordance with the terms of the
compensation enhancement program under which the funding is provided.
…
Regulations
11 (1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations for carrying out the
purposes and provisions of this Act.
Compensation enhancement programs
…
Same
4
(3) A regulation may set out the eligibility requirements and terms of a compensation
enhancement program or may incorporate them by reference from a document as the
document may be amended from time to time.
[4] The document titled “Personal Support Workers and Direct Support Workers Permanent
Compensation Enhancement Program” prescribed by Regulation 413/22 speaks to eligibility for
the program across various health care sectors but does not delineate other program terms.
[5] The Guidelines for the administration of the permanent compensation enhancement
program, referred to in paragraph 12 of the ASF, are not prescribed. They were generated by the
Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services (“MCCSS”) and apply to MCCSS-funded
organizations, which includes this Employer. The MCCSS Guidelines provide:
1.0 PRINCIPLES
…
The goal of the Program is to support organizations to hire and retain these workers by
offering a competitive wage that recognizes their vital role in providing health and social
services across the province.
The permanent wage enhancement will help to stabilize, attract, and retain the workforce
needed to provide a high level of care during the COVID-19 pandemic and to continue these
important supports in the long-term recovery from the pandemic.
…
4.1 Program Administration
Eligible workers will receive $3 per hour compensation enhancement for all paid hours.
…
Employers will be reimbursed for the incremental increase in the cost of employer
contributions to CPP, EI, EHT and WSIB as well as the incremental increase in the cost of
providing statutory entitlements (e.g., holiday pay, paid sick days, vacation pay, or
overtime, if applicable) in accordance with the Employment Standards Act or any applicable
collective agreement(s). These amounts are included in the payment and can be adjusted
through the budget submission and contracting process.
Discretionary benefits (i.e., LTIP, life insurance, drug, dental and vision care), as well as any
other incremental increases can be adjusted through the budget submission and
contracting process. Please note discretionary benefits were not included as part of the
temporary wage enhancement. If employers incur any costs related to discretionary
benefits, employers are encouraged to contact their ministry representative and provide
necessary supporting documentation including applicable collective agreement(s) through
the budget submission and contracting process. If approved by the ministry, the
discretionary benefits will be included in your funding for the Program.
…
5
[6] Article 45 of the collective agreement provides:
45.01 An employee, who has completed a minimum of one (1) year of continuous service
with Pathways and who ceases to be an employee because of;
(i) death,
(ii) retirement,
(iii) permanent lay-off, or
(iv) resignation
is entitled to the following severance pay:
…
2. Those full and part-time Pathways employees hired after February 17th, 1997
shall receive one (1) week' s regular pay for each year of continuous service. Such
termination pay shall not exceed twenty- six (26) weeks' regular pay.
[7] The Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the parties that pertains to the
implementation of the permanent wage enhancement program provides, in part:
Whereas the Ontario government passed legislation Supporting Retention in the Public
Services Act and the supporting Ontario Regulation 413/22: Personal Support Workers and
Direct Support Workers on April 21, 2022. This Regulation outlines a targeted permanent
compensation enhancement program for eligible Personal Support and Direct Support
Workers in the Health and Community Services Sectors;
And whereas the parties operating in good faith wish to set out the terms under which the
Employer’s employees shall be paid further to this Program;
…
The Parties agree that the Permanent compensation enhancement program applies to all
paid hours, including vacation days, statutory holidays, overtime and sick time, and is a part
of pensionable earnings.
…
The Employer agrees to pay eligible current employees the difference between “paid
hours” as defined above and direct hours worked by the employee and paid under the
Temporary Wage Enhancement Program that did not include vacation, statutory holidays,
sick time and was not part of pensionable earnings, as required under the Permanent Wage
Compensation Enhancement Program...
…
The Parties agree as follows:
1. The Parties agree to continue [the] Permanent Compensation Wage Enhancement
Program in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Program as amended
from time to time for as long as the Program is fully funded by the government.
6
2. In the event that the funds in the Program are discontinued or redirected by the
government, the wages will immediately revert back to the rates for those eligible
classifications set out in Appendix A: Wages & Classifications of the Collective
Agreement.
3. Nothing in this Memorandum is intended to imply that the PWE forms part of the
collective agreement. For clarity, the parties agree that the PWE will not become
part of the wage grid in the collective agreement.
Submissions of the Parties
[8] The parties referred me to the following authorities:
• Trillium Health Partners v Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 5180, 2021 CanLII 49776
(ON LA) (Randazzo);
• Community Living Mississauga v OPSEU Local 251, 2023 CanLII 110239 (ON LA) (Waddingham);
• Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 786 v St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, 2022 CanLII
73881 (ON LA) (Nyman);
• Hampton Terrace Care Centre v Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 5173, 2023
CanLII 106643 (ON LA) (Albertyn);
• Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1748 v County of Northumberland (Golden Plough
Lodge), 2023 CanLII 113227 (ON LA) (Schmidt);
• Atco Lumber Ltd. v. IWA-Canada, Local 1-405, 2004 CarswellBC 2935 (Hall);
• Cambridge Memorial Hospital v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1 Canada, 2011
CanLII 1790 (ON LA) (Surdykowski)
• Ontario Nurses’ Association v Grand River Hospital Corporation, 2019 CanLII 86451 (ON LA)
(Anderson); and
• Ontario Power Generation and Society of Energy Professionals, 2013 CanLII 70432 (ON LA)
(Surdykowski)
[9] While agreeing to the fundamental principles of contract interpretation, the parties
disagreed as to their appropriate application in the circumstances.
[10] The Union relied on the words “regular pay” in Article 45 of the collective agreement to
argue that severance pay properly included the wage enhancement amount. The amount was
intended to enhance compensation for eligible employees, argued the Union, and was payable
for all paid hours.
[11] The Union reviewed provisions of the collective agreement to note that various terms had
been used by the parties to refer to and identify compensation, including the words “wages”,
“hourly rate”, “wage grid”, “salary”, “gross pay”, and “regular pay”. It argued that, while not
forming part of the wage grid, the enhancement amount was properly included as part of the
monies “regularly” paid to eligible employees. The term “regular pay” was used in relation to
holiday pay and vacation pay when computing those amounts in distinction from identifying
one’s basic hourly rate, argued the Union. Different terms must be understood to have different
7
meanings, argued the Union, referring to the decisions in Cambridge Memorial Hospital and
Grand River Hospital Corp., both supra.
[12] The MOU also supported a broad interpretation to be given the term “regular pay”,
argued the Union, as the parties agreed that the wage enhancement applied to all paid hours,
referring to more than simply the wage rates set out in the wage grid and more than simply hours
worked. While in a different context, in both the Hampton Terrace Care Centre and County of
Northumberland decisions, supra, the “base wage” was found to include the wage enhancement,
supporting a similar interpretive inclusion in “regular pay”, argued the Union.
[13] As the SRPSA was benefit-conferring legislation, it should be given a broad and liberal
interpretation, argued the Union. If there was any ambiguity as to entitlement, it should be
resolved in favour of the party claiming the benefit, argued the Union, referring to the decisions
in Trillium Health Partners, supra, at paras. 24 – 27 and St. Joseph’s Healthcare, supra, at paras.
56-58.
[14] As well, argued the Union, severance pay was an earned benefit in recognition of service
that has been rendered. It was earned and notionally banked throughout one’s employ, argued
the Union, referring to the decision in Atco Lumber Ltd, supra.
[15] In contrast, the Employer looked to both the temporary and permanent compensation
enhancement programs as being expressly intended to promote and support the hiring and
retention of front-line staff during and following the pandemic. The SRPSA is titled “Supporting
Retention”, noted the Employer. It referred to the Principles set out in the Guidelines (at para. 5
above), arguing that an intention of enhancing compensation in order to hire and retain staff was
the opposite of making monies available to be paid on a separation from employment.
[16] The SRPSA is clear that this funding is to be used in accordance with the terms of the wage
enhancement program, argued the Employer, which terms are dictated by the government
documents. The permanent program was expanded in scope, increasing its application from
“hours worked” to “hours paid”. While there is reference to reimbursement for “discretionary
benefits” and/or the incremental increase in the “cost of providing statutory entitlements…in
accordance with the [ESA] or any applicable collective agreement(s)”, there is no express
reference to severance pay in the documents, noted the Employer.
[17] The Employer argued that the Guidelines refer to the reimbursement of the incremental
costs of providing “statutory entitlements” whether under the ESA or a collective agreement. It
argued that this language did not include “any” entitlement under the terms of a collective
agreement, which agreements often provide a greater benefit that that conferred by the ESA.
[18] Article 45 of the collective agreement has nothing to do with retention and provides for
the payment of severance pay more broadly than either the ESA requirement or many collective
agreements, argued the Employer, arguably giving rise to an incentive to leave employment.
8
Calculating severance pay as including the wage enhancement amount would run counter to
government guidelines and to the clear legislative intention and purpose of the wage
enhancement program, argued the Employer.
[19] “Regular pay” is not defined in the collective agreement, noted the Employer. However,
Article 19.07 (holiday pay), Article 39.12 (PT vacation); and Articles 44.05, 44.06 and 44.07 (sick
leave) each refer to “regular pay”, and each are also expressly considered in the MOU as having
the wage enhancement added to those entitlements, noted the Employer. Through the MOU the
parties specifically turned their minds to the future application of the wage enhancement
program and the issue of “hours worked” versus “hours paid”, yet did not say that the wage
enhancement would apply to the payment of severance pay either retroactively or in the future,
argued the Employer.
[20] The MOU defined the circumstances where the wage enhancement would be included as
“paid hours”, argued the Employer, and included vacation, overtime, sick time, and holiday pay
(but not severance), mirroring the language of the Guidelines, noted the Employer. That is
duplicated in the provision for retroactivity under the permanent program that expressly
included only these same entitlements as part of paid hours, retroactively to the effective date
of the permanent program, it argued.
[21] Article 45, also referencing “regular pay”, is not included in the MOU, supporting the
interpretation that the parties agreed that the wage enhancement amount was not to be
included in the calculation of severance pay, argued the Employer. Article 45 can only have
reference to wages paid under the collective agreement which are known not to include the wage
enhancement funds, argued the Employer.
[22] The Employer argued that to confer a monetary benefit in the collective agreement, clear
language is required, relying on paras. 20-22 of the decision in Ontario Power Generation, supra.
Article 45 does not clearly provide that the wage enhancement amounts are to be included as
part of “regular pay” and are thereby properly excluded, argued the Employer.
[23] As well, argued the Employer, the MOU expressly states that the wage enhancement does
not form part of the collective agreement and/or the wage grid; that wages in Appendix A of the
collective agreement are not to be amended by the amount of the wage enhancement. There is
nothing therefore, argued the Employer, that would allow the wage enhancement to be added
to the wage rate. Rather, it argued, including the wage enhancement amount in the calculation
of “regular pay” would be to expand the meaning of that term and inappropriately add to the
collective agreement.
[24] In reply, the Union disagreed that enhancing severance pay was contrary to the purpose
of the legislation as it reflected compensation for services rendered, but on a deferred basis. It
noted that Article 45 spoke to more than voluntary departures and included permanent lay-offs,
a matter captured by statutory entitlements under the ESA. Recognition that the wage
9
enhancement does not form part of the wage grid does not speak to whether it is included in
“regular pay”, it argued.
[25] The Union argued that, in the MOU, the parties agreed that the program applied to “all
paid hours, including” holiday, vacation and pensionable earnings. That was permissive, not
exclusionary or restrictive language, argued the Union, and the fact that severance was not
specifically addressed does not mean it is not included. Similarly, the retroactive payment was
applicable only to current employees and would not have applied to anyone who had left and
received severance before the MOU came into effect, noted the Union.
[26] Finally, while the Employer relied on paragraph 3 of the MOU, the Union relied on
paragraph 2, which acknowledged that, if the program was discontinued, “wages will… revert
back to the rates…set out in Appendix A…”. The Union argued that the parties understood and
acknowledged that the enhancement affected the “wages” of eligible workers. Rather than
expanding the collective agreement, including the wage enhancement in the calculation of
severance pay gives force to the agreement of the parties, argued the Union.
Decision
[27] This is a case of first impression and none of the authorities provided address the issue. I
have therefore set out the parties’ submissions in some detail. The case is also fundamentally a
matter of collective agreement interpretation.
[28] The permanent wage enhancement program is intended to enhance the ability of eligible
employers to hire and retain eligible employees. Consideration of an enhanced payment of
severance pay may seem counter-intuitive to that program’s purpose. However, my role is not
to interpret and apply the terms of that program. My task is to interpret and apply the terms of
the collective agreement. At issue here is Article 45 of the collective agreement which provides
for the payment of severance pay in any of four circumstances; death, retirement, permanent
lay-off, or resignation.
[29] The proposition in OPG, supra, that entitlement to a monetary benefit must be derived
from clear collective agreement language is reflected in the words of Article 45 that clearly
stipulate employees “shall receive” one week’s regular pay for each year of continuous service
(to a maximum of 26 weeks) on a recognized departure from employment. The issue here is not
with establishing entitlement to the monetary benefit but with the appropriate calculation of
that entitlement.
[30] That falls to be determined based on the proper interpretation of the words “regular pay”
in Article 45.
(I simply note that Article 45 of the collective agreement includes circumstances that involve both
non-voluntary (permanent layoff) and voluntary (resignation and retirement) departures from
10
employment, with the former potentially triggering a statutory entitlement under the ESA, while
the latter typically do not. While titled “Severance Payments”, Article 45 also appears to refer to
severance pay and termination pay interchangeably, even while those terms reference different
ESA entitlements.)
[31] Looking to the collective agreement, the parties agree that “regular pay” is not defined.
The term appears in Article 19.07 of the collective agreement in relation to the payment of part-
time holiday pay as 4% of gross pay (not including vacation pay) that “shall be added to the part-
time employee’s regular pay to compensate for the holidays…”. If a part-time employee is
scheduled to work on a holiday they are to receive two times their basic hourly rate for all hours
worked in addition to the 4%.
[32] Article 39.12 of the collective agreement stipulates that 4% of gross pay “shall be added
to the part-time employee’s regular pay in lieu of vacation leave with pay”.
[33] Article 44.05 of the collective agreement requires that deductions for insurance coverage
and pension contributions “that would be made from regular pay”, be similarly deducted from
the payment of sick leave. Article 44 also identifies an entitlement to “regular salary” or a portion
thereof as paid sick leave.
[34] Article 44.06 of the collective agreement provides that an employee in receipt of sick
leave at 75% of “regular salary” is entitled to use credits from their accumulated sick bank to top
up that payment in order to “receive regular pay”. Similarly, Article 44.07 stipulates that an
employee who is absent due to sickness in excess of the period of short-term sick leave coverage
shall have accumulated attendance credits reduced (utilized) so the employee “shall receive
regular pay”.
[35] None of these provisions address what is included in “regular pay”. Appendix A of the
collective agreement sets out classifications and a corresponding wage grid where wages are
expressed as hourly rates. The hours of work provision at Article 7 of the collective agreement
sets out “normal hours of work” for different groups of employees (Schedule A employees,
Schedule B employees, and employees on a compressed work week). The “normal hours of work”
are variously described by hours per day, hours per week, or hours per shift. Articles 7.04 and
7.05 refer to “weekly salary” being adjusted based on one’s “basic hourly rate”.
[36] Taken together, wages expressed as hourly rates combined with normal hours of work
would generally reflect one’s “regular pay”, that is, what an employee typically receives for
having worked the usual hours at the assigned wage rate in any given pay period. The ordinary
meaning of the words “regular pay” would indicate an employee’s typical or usual earnings.
“Regular pay” generally represents the result of multiplying the normal hours of work with the
appropriate hourly rate for the work being performed.
11
[37] It would also typically exclude ‘extra’ payments arising from circumstances such as
working overtime or other premiums that are not attributable to an employee’s ‘normal’ hours
of work. The determination of one’s ‘regular pay’ is based on a review of the compensation
received over a period of time in light of the employee’s particular work circumstances, having
regard to the terms of the applicable collective agreement.
[38] Does the MOU between the parties provide any clarity as to the term “regular pay” as
used in the collective agreement? The parties each rely on a different statement in the MOU.
Paragraph 2 of the MOU stipulates that if the permanent wage enhancement funds are
discontinued, “wages will immediately revert back to the rates…in Appendix A” of the collective
agreement. This indicates that the parties take the view that, while available, “wages” include
the permanent wage enhancement amount. Otherwise there would be no need for wages to
revert should that government funding no longer be available.
[39] Paragraph 3 of the MOU stipulates that the permanent wage enhancement does not form
part of the collective agreement and specifically, that the enhancement will not become part of
the wage grid. That is consistent with paragraph 2 in that the permanent wage enhancement is
a funding amount that, if discontinued by the government, does not become an independent
ongoing liability to the Employer as having been incorporated into the collective agreement.
[40] The MOU expressly states that the permanent wage enhancement program applies to all
paid hours. That includes hours worked, as well as hours paid but not worked, such as vacation,
holidays, or sick leave. These entitlements (payable when not working) are based on “regular
pay” - what the employee would have earned had they been working in the normal course.
[41] By expressly referencing those benefits in the MOU, and consistent with the statement in
paragraph 2 of the MOU, the parties have effectively acknowledged that the permanent wage
enhancement is included as part of “regular pay”. If regular pay under the collective agreement
(contemplating pay for time worked) was intended not to include the wage enhancement
amount, there would have been no need to, or interest in acknowledging that it applied with
respect to the calculation of holiday pay, vacation pay, and sick leave which are based on one’s
regular pay. Put differently, the parties did not stipulate that “regular pay” under the collective
agreement was not to include the permanent wage enhancement amount.
[42] I am not persuaded that the first sentence in paragraph 3 of the MOU indicates a different
result. Acknowledging that the calculation of “regular pay” as required by the collective
agreement includes the amount representative of the permanent wage enhancement does not
constitute an amendment or alteration of the collective agreement or make the wage
enhancement amount part of the wage grid. The calculation of “regular pay” is determined
having regard to the compensation amount an employee has been receiving as regular payment
for the work they are performing. There is nothing inherently contradictory in recognizing the
wage enhancement amount as part of regular pay, particularly when the collective agreement is
12
silent as to its definition. Failing to include that amount would be inaccurate in relation to the
pay eligible employees are regularly receiving during the ongoing operation of the program.
[43] That is also consistent with the parties’ agreement in the MOU that the permanent wage
enhancement applies to “all paid hours, including”, those specifically delineated. That language
is inclusive and non-exhaustive. Severance pay is an earned, albeit deferred compensation
benefit. I am persuaded, given this agreement, and absent any clear prohibition on this
application, that the term “regular pay” in Article 45 of the collective agreement is properly
interpreted to include the permanent wage enhancement amount, an amount paid on an hourly
basis for hours worked.
[44] The SRPSA stipulates that this funding is to be used “to enhance the compensation paid
to employees”. That purpose is intact. Other than that legislative direction, there was no
evidence as to how the permanent wage enhancement program was being applied in terms of
the reimbursement for incremental costs as referred to in section 4.1 of the MCCSS Guidelines,
whether for statutory entitlements or discretionary benefits. Collective agreement benefits
(including holiday, vacation, and sick pay, as well as severance pay) are often greater than the
statutory entitlement. It would seem to run counter to its purpose to structure a compensation
enhancement program that had the effect of imposing compensation costs on an employer which
are not then able to be reimbursed under that program. However the MCCSS Guidelines do not
provide relevant details, nor do they have any force of law as they are not prescribed by
regulation. It is a policy document at best. Absent clearer legislative direction or limitation with
respect to the use of the wage enhancement funds, they represent another source of
government funding (for purposes of compensation) to this Employer, which in turn, is obliged
to apply the terms of its collective agreement.
[45] Having regard to all of the above, I find that “regular pay” in Article 45 of the collective
agreement is properly interpreted to include any permanent wage enhancement amount paid to
an eligible employee and that severance pay is to be calculated accordingly. I will remain seized
with respect to any issue arising from the implementation of this award.
[46] This grievance is allowed.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 21st day of October, 2024.
“Marilyn A. Nairn”
__________________________________________