The Ford government has suffered a new defeat in the Ontario Court of Appeal, which confirmed Monday that midwives are actually subject to some form of salary discrimination compared to doctors in the province. Midwives have been fighting for recognition for their work for four years.
The Ontario government has argued that it does not need to give midwives a 20% pay increase in 2011 as ordered by the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal in 2018.
He claimed in November before the Ontario Court of Appeals that the decisions of the two lower courts were not based on any reliable and undeniable evidence of wage discrimination based on gender.
He argued that the benchmarks established by the province in 1993 when the midwifery profession was created have changed annually and are no longer relevant today.
The need for doctors also replaces, according to the government, that for midwives in Ontario, which explains the wage gap between the two groups.
The government asked the Court of Appeal to overturn the lower court’s judgment.
conflicting positions
The Ontario Association of Midwives claims that the government only sought all of these legal remedies to avoid providing them with compensation.
She pointed out that the Ministry of Health violated midwives ’rights to fair treatment under sections 3, 5, and 9 of the Ontario Human Rights Code.
Gender has always been, according to the Association, a factor in the mistreatment of midwives seeking justice since 1997.
The two parties decided to create a joint and independent financial compensation committee to be paid in the event of gender -based discrimination. The committee then produced the Courtyard report.
In 2010, the report recommended that the Ministry of Health restructure midwives ’salaries by 20% to compensate for their salary gap among nurse practitioners and general practitioners.
However, the government never acted on it.
The appeal was denied
The Ontario Court of Appeals, which agreed with the Association, therefore dismissed the province’s appeal. Note: the three judges who heard the appeal were women.
In particular, he wrote that the Code gives the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal broad remedial discretion to prescribe remedies that are fair, effective and appropriate to the circumstances of the particular case [comme celui-ci].
” Using his remedial discretion, the arbitrator made a remedy based on the evidence before him. [mais] the Ontario Ministry of Health has not indicated any legitimate reason to interfere with the Tribunal’s decision on what to do about the situation. “
The Court of Appeal determined that the arbitrator of the Tribunal had to decide the dispute the best available evidencewhich existed at the time of the first hearing.
According to him, the province’s abandonment of the principles in 1993 stated in the Courtyard report was a result of the current situation.
He added that the arbitrator had already written that the implementation of the Courtyard Report would have brought the parties closer to the issues of discrimination gender -based salary equity.
The highest court in the land concluded that the lower court’s reasons were transparent and understandable.
The Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General did not respond to our requests for comment at the time of publication of this article.
More details to come.
Source: Radio-Canada
