Skip to content

Client Update: Pay equity legislation announced for federally regulated employers

Julia Parent and Graham Haynes

On October 29, 2018, the federal government tabled national pay equity legislation as part of its second budget implementation bill, Bill C-86. This legislation is targeted at reducing the portion of the gender wage gap which is caused by the undervaluation of work traditionally done by women.

Application

The Act, entitled An Act to Establish a Proactive Pay Equity Regime within the Federal Public and Private Sectors (Pay Equity Act) (the “Act”) applies to all federally regulated employers with 10 or more employees, including the federal public service, the federal private sector (i.e. banks, telecommunication companies, marine shipping companies, interprovincial and international transportation companies and others) and the Prime Minister and ministers’ offices.

It is worth noting that the requirements imposed under the Act are different for small employers (defined as those with 10 to 99 employees) and large employers (defined as those with 100 employees or more).

Obligations for employers

Development of a pay equity plan

The Act requires employers to develop a comprehensive pay equity plan within three years of becoming subject to the Act. The pay equity plan must, among other things, identify job classes and their gender predominance in the workplace, analyze the value of the job classes within the workplace and identify where imbalances exist between female and male predominant job classes of equal value.

Compensation equalization

If an employer’s pay equity plan identifies imbalances in a female-predominant job class when compared to male-predominant job classes of equal value, employers will have to phase-in compensation increases which equalize the compensation paid to the female-predominant job class. This may apply to more than one female-predominant job class. If the total equalization amount is at least one percent of the employer’s annual payroll, the employer will have to implement compensation increases. The number of years the entity will have to equalize payment is based on the size of the employer.

Other obligations

The Act also imposes other responsibilities on employers such as providing information to employees regarding dispute resolution procedures, updating the pay equity plan every five years and submitting a short annual statement regarding oversight of the program.

Enforcement

The Act contemplates the appointment of a Pay Equity Commissioner and the creation of a Pay Equity Unit of the Canadian Human Rights Commission which would administer and enforce the Act through a range of compliance and enforcement tools including monetary penalties.

Further information

This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above information, and how it applies to your specific situation, please contact a member of the Stewart McKelvey Labour and Employment group.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top