Grievance Case Summary - G-379

The Grievor was hired as a civilian member at the minimum rate of engagement for her classification. Later she learned that two males colleagues who were hired after her were receiving salaries that were considerably higher than the minimum rate of engagement, and also higher than her own. The Grievor complained that the salary differential was discriminatory and she requested that her salary be adjusted to the same level as the highest paid of the two males, retroactive to her start date. This request was denied on the basis that the Grievor had agreed to the salary level at the time that she was hired.

The Committee found that the OIC erred when he assessed the discrimination complaint without following the steps and considering the factors set out in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the related Equal Wages Guidelines, 1986. Due to lack of information on the file, the Committee found that it is not possible for the wage discrimination complaint to be decided at Level II.

The Committee recommended to the Commissioner of the RCMP that he allow the grievance and order a full review of the Grievor's complaint of gender discrimination in the setting of wages.

The Commissioner has rendered her decision in this matter, as summarized by her office:

The Commissioner agreed with the ERC that the proper Respondent to the grievance is the Officer in Charge of Informatics and that the Grievor had standing to bring the grievance. The Commissioner also agreed with the ERC that the grievance was filed within the time limit prescribed by para. 31(2)(a) of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act.

With respect to the merits of the grievance, the Commissioner could not perform the analysis required by the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Equal Wages Guidelines, 1986 because the relevant information is lacking from the file, such as the information requested by the Grievor pursuant to s. 31(4) of the Act. The matter is therefore returned to Level I for reconsideration and redetermination.