ANALYSIS AND DECISION. [9] For each issue in dispute, we will, as the case may be, summarize the applicable rules of law, relevant evidence, the parties’ claims and their respective latest proposals, and come to a decision. Direct wage gap [10] It goes without saying that this issue is the most complex and was the subject of much of the evidence heard as part of the first award and in the discussions during the mediation/arbitration process. As reported in the May 31, 2018 award, the complexity stems from differences in the compensation methods of the two comparable groups (RSMCs and letter carriers), and from differences in the allocation of workloads and time measurement systems or estimated volume for each route assigned to each RSMC and letter carrier. [11] Before starting the analysis of the parties’ latest proposals, a reminder of some critical legal guidelines is required, as they constitute the framework for analysis. The Canadian Human Rights Act (the Act) is considered fundamental and quasi-constitutional because of the fundamental nature of the rights it protects. Thus, it must be interpreted in a broad and liberal way, in light of its objectives and context, in this case the eradication of gender-based wage discrimination. Once discrimination has been demonstrated, the applicable standard is that of “reasonable reliability”: “[215] [...] since perfect gender neutrality is probably unattainable and pay equity is not susceptible to precise measurement, “one should be satisfied with reasonably accurate results based on what is, according to one’s sense, a fair and equitable resolution” of a wage gap between men and women performing work of equal value.”2 [12] Finally, in addition to these elementary considerations, there are the following: “[653] From these more general principles, the Undersigned retains the following as essential to the analysis of either party’s methodology: the direct wage compensation methodology must be analysed in a flexible, case-by-case, approach that complies with the intention and purpose of the Act and the Guidelines. However, the data must still be correct, and the job rate has to be calculated as accurately as possible, in a manner that is least disruptive to the collective agreement and that aligns with the compensation practices of the parties. To this end, similarly to what is done with the job evaluation outcome, the results must be tested against the evidence to ensure they correspond to the realities of the workers. Thus, it is throu...
ANALYSIS AND DECISION. 89 The issue for determination is whether the parties mutually intended that service for part-time employees (including periods of part-time employment) be calculated based on a calendar period of employment, or the Employer’s method of calculating an accredited service date. 90 This difference lies to be resolved by applying the established canons of interpretation. The following re-statement of principles appears in Pacific Press: The object of interpretation is to discover the mutual intention of theparties. The primary resource for an interpretation is the collective agreement. Extrinsic evidence (evidence outside the official record of agreement, being the written collective agreement itself) is only helpful when it reveals the mutual intention. Extrinsic evidence may clarify but not contradict a collective agreement. A very important promise is likely to be clearly and unequivocally expressed. In construing two provisions a harmonious interpretation is preferred rather than one which places them in conflict. All clauses and words in a collective agreement should be given meaning, if possible. Where an agreement uses different words, one presumes that the parties intended different meanings. Ordinarily words in a collective agreement should be given their plain meaning. Parties are presumed to know about relevant jurisprudence. 91 The parties also point to extrinsic evidence regarding the exchange of bargaining proposals.
ANALYSIS AND DECISION. 24 When determining appropriateness issues, the Labour Relations Board (the "Board") is concerned about two competing policy objectives: access to collective bargaining and industrial stability. In an initial application for certification such as this, access to collective bargaining is the paramount consideration. Industrial stability is only of secondary importance, but it is not irrelevant. The viability of collective bargaining is a key factor in assessing industrial stability, and the structure of the bargaining unit is a key factor in assessing whether collective bargaining will be viable: Island Publishers Ltd. (d.b.a. Xxxxxxxx River Mirror & North Island Weekender), [2001] X.X.X.X.X. Xx. 00, XXXXX Xx. X00/0000, 69 C.L.R.B.R. (2d) 60 ("Island Publishers"). 25 The Board is not limited to certifying the most appropriate bargaining unit. More than one potential bargaining unit may be appropriate. While the Board has a preference for all-employee units, the Board will certify a less than all-employee unit provided the unit is appropriate.
ANALYSIS AND DECISION. A. Requirements of Section 252(e)(2)(A) of the Act
ANALYSIS AND DECISION. 11. We have considered the submissions made by the Petitioner. The Commission in its order dated 6.12.2016 in Petition No. 219/MP/2016 has granted approval under Section 17(3) and (4) of the Act for creation of security in favour of IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited. The original lender, namely IndusInd Bank Ltd. made available financial assistance amounting to Rs. 416.00 crore as Rupee Term Loan for the project. As per the Common Facility Agreement dated 18.9.2016, the original estimated project cost and financing plan is as under: Particular Rupee ( in crore) Percentage Debt 461.00 70% Equity 197.10 30% Total 658.10 100%
ANALYSIS AND DECISION
