PEO logo

Ontario’s Pay Equity Act

with Selected Case References, 2022

Disclaimer: This Guide gives an overview of the minimum requirements of the Pay Equity Act as interpreted by the Pay Equity Office. The interpretations are drawn from our own experiences and by applying the key rulings of the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal and the courts and is current to the date ​of publication.

Achievement of pay equity (s. 5.1(1))

In this section

5.1. (1) For the purposes of this Act, pay equity is achieved in an establishment when every female job class in the establishment has been compared to a job class or job classes under the job to job method of comparison or the proportional value method of comparison, or, in the case of an employer to whom Part III.2 applies, the proxy method of comparison, and any adjustment to the job rate of each female job class that is indicated by the comparison has been made

Commport Communications International Inc. v. Pay Equity Commission, 2006 CanLII 61261 (ON PEHT) 2006-07-14 — The employer argued they did not need to take steps to establish pay equity because their corporate policy statement included a statement “adjusting to meet pay equity requirements.” A Review Officer concluded that the employer had not taken appropriate steps, and directed it, in some detail, to collect job information, evaluate jobs, make comparisons, pay adjustments and to post the Order in the workplace. The Tribunal affirms the Officer’s decision and confirms the proactive requirement for employers to take the specific steps under Part I in order to achieve pay equity.

Oakwood Retirement Communities Inc. v. S.E.I.U. Local 1 Canada, 2010 CanLII 76245 (ON PEHT) 2010-12-15 — A Review Officer determined that there had been a number of contraventions of the Act in the pay equity agreement between the Employer and predecessor Union. The Tribunal set out the specific steps that an employer covered by Part I of the Act must take to achieve pay equity from the outset of operations. This includes establishing job classes as defined by the Act; determining the gender dominance of the job classes; and making comparisons between male and female job classes in terms of compensation and value of work performed having regard to skill, effort, responsibility, and the conditions under which the work is performed. If the comparisons between male and female job classes reveal gender discrimination in compensation for work performed by employees in female job classes, the Part I employer must redress it by adjusting the job rates of the lower paid employees in the female job class. The Part I employer does not enjoy the benefit of a phase-in period to achieve pay equity. It must comply with the Act from the outset.

Ottawa Board of Education v. Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, 1996 CanLII 7947 (ON PEHT) 1996-05-28 — The Employer had a deemed approved non-union pay equity plan. Upon the certification of a new bargaining agent for a group of non-union employees, the union sought to negotiate a pay equity plan due to changed circumstances and alleged contravention of the Act The Employer argued they had no obligation to negotiate and that the deemed approved plan complied with the Act .The Tribunal was asked to determine if an employer, who had a deemed equity plan in place, was obliged to negotiate with a newly certified bargaining agent to maintain pay equity. They were also asked to determine what the appropriate standard of review was to determine if contravnetion. The Tribunal held that the standard of review regarding job evaluation, job data collection, comparisons, and comparison tool (GNCS) is reasonableness, not a standard of correctness. The Act allows for a range of outcomes, and choices are available to the negotiating parties. Specifically, the standard of review applicable to determining whether a contravention has been established is different, depending upon whether the provision relied on sets an exact minimum standard or implies a range.

Deemed compliance

(2) A pay equity plan that used the proportional value method of comparison shall be deemed to have complied with section 6, as it reads immediately before this section comes into force,

(a) from the date on which the plan is posted if it is posted before Part 1 comes into force by an employer to whom Part II applies; or

(b) from the date on which the plan is prepared if it is prepared before Part 1 comes into force by an employer to whom Part III applies. 1993, c. 4, s. 3.

See what we’ve been up to lately!

Follow us on social media for the latest news.

Ontario Coat of Arms

© King’s Printer
for Ontario, 2023

Go to Top