AI-assisted research summary: This regulation limits how pay equity is maintained for a female job class when the comparable male job class gets a compensation increase in certain arbitration or tribunal decisions.
1. The requirement to maintain pay equity for any female job class is limited in the manner prescribed in this Regulation where, (a) a male job class has been used as the basis of a job-to-job comparison to a female job class in a pay equity plan; and (b) the compensation for that male job class is increased as a result of a decision of an arbitrator, board of arbitration or other tribunal other than a decision that results from the failure of the parties to a collective agreement to reach an agreement in the course of bargaining for a collective agreement or the renewal of one. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 1. 2. Despite section 1, this Regulation does not apply so as to reduce the compensation paid to the members of the female job class. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 2. 3. (1) The employer may declare that the male job class for which the compensation has been increased shall no longer be used for comparison with the female job class in the pay equity plan. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 3 (1). (2) The employer shall, within thirty days after the decision of the arbitrator, board or tribunal, give written notice of the declaration to the bargaining agent for the female job class and the employer and bargaining agent shall negotiate a new comparison for the female job class. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 3 (2). (3) If the employer declares that a male job class shall no longer be used, the increase in compensation shall not apply to the female job class which had been compared to it. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 3 (3). (4) Subsection (3) applies to all decisions of the arbitrator, board or tribunal even if the increases are retroactive. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 3 (4). 4. (1) Within ninety days after the employer gives written notice under subsection 3 (2), the parties shall negotiate the new comparison for the female job class using the job-to-job method of comparison or the proportional value method of comparison. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 4 (1). (2) If the parties cannot agree on the new comparison within the ninety-day period, they shall use the job-to-job comparison method described in section 5 if applicable and, if not, the proportional value comparison method described in section 6. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 4 (2). 5. (1) If the parties in preparing the pay equity plan have previously identified a male job class as being of equal or comparable value to the female job class and the job rate for that male job class is the same as the rate for the former male job class before it was increased under clause 1 (b), that previously identified male job class shall be used for the purposes of a job-to-job comparison with the female job class. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 5 (1). (2) If subsection (1) does not apply but there are male job classes previously identified in preparing the pay equity plan as being of equal or comparable value to the female job class, the previously identified male job class with the job rate nearest to but higher than the rate of the former male job class before it was increased shall be used for the job-to-job comparison with the female job class. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 5 (2). 6. If the parties are not able to make a comparison under section 5, they shall negotiate a comparison using the proportional value method of comparison and Part III.1 of the Act applies with necessary modification to the comparison. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 6. 7. The parties shall incorporate any changes made under this Regulation into their pay equity plan and the employer shall post a copy of the changes to the plan in accordance with subsections 1 (2) and (3) of the Act. O. Reg. 491/93, s. 7. 8. Omitted (provides for coming into force of provisions of this Regulation). O. Reg. 491/93, s. 8.