_244) Hearinq Date of Award
COLLINGWOOD Feb 7 1985
80y -GOE IN THE MATTER OF THE POLICE ACT
RSO 1980 Chapter 381
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Between
THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATIONOF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD(hereinafter called the Town)
-and-
THE COLLINGWOOD POLICE ASSOCIATION (CIVILIAN MEMBERS)(hereinafter called the Association)
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN INTEREST ARBITRATION
Re 1984 Civilian Personnel Agreement
ARBITRATOR DR ARJUN P AGGARWAL
APPEARANCES
FOR THE TOWN
Mr Stephen C Bernardo - Counsel
Mr Carman Morrison - Town Administrator
FOR THE ASSOCIATION
Const Michael Chevers - President
Ms Cheryl Thomas - Civilian Representative
The hearing in this matter was held on January 21 1985
in Collingwood Ontario
AWARD
The undersigned was appointed by the Solicitor-
General Honourable George W Taylor QC on November
30 1984 pursuant to section 32 of the Police Act RSO
1980 Chapter 381 to act as an arbitrator to hear and
determine all matters in dispute between the parties
relating to their 1984 Collective Agreement negotiations
(Civilian Personnel) The hearing in this matter was held
in Collingwood Ontario on January 21 1985 At the outshy
set the representatives of the parties agreed that the
arbitrator had been properly appointed and that the time
limits prescribed by the Act for the commencement of the
arbitration hearing had been complied with It was further
agreed that I had the jurisdiction to deal with the matters
in dispute It was also agreed that the issues before
this arbitrator are for the Collective Agreement for the
year 1984 ie from 1st of January to 31st of December
1984
INTRODUCTION
The Township of Collingwood is situated in Central
Ontario in the County of Simcoe It is located approxishy
mately 150 kilometers Northwest of Toronto on the shore
-J-
of Georgian Bay The Town of Collingwood covers 82
square kilometers ranking it 4th in the Simcoe area behind
Barrie at 70 square kilometers Orillia at 115 square
kilometers and Midland at 114 square kilometers
The Town of Collingwood has a current population of
approximately 12000 Among the larger employers in
Collingwood are LOF Glass the Collingwood Shipyards
Harding Carpets Daal Specialties (now Bendex Restraint
System) Canadian Mist Distillers Kaufman of Collingwood
Goodyear Hose Plant Goodall Rubber the Town of Collingwood
and the Simcoe County Board of Education Collingwoods
secondary industry of course is tourism
The Town of Collingwood with its Blue Mountains is also a
famous ski resort for the Southern Ontario It draws a
large number of touristsiskiers in winter and campers in
summer from as far south of the border as Michigan and
New York
The Town of CollingwoodPolice Force is consisted of
18 uniform officers and 6 civilians as follows
- -- -- - - -- ----
-4shy
OFFICERS CIVILIANS
1 Police Chief 1 Clerk Stenographer
1 Staff Sargeant 5 Station-Operator-Typists
3 Sargeants
12 First Class Constables
1 Fourth Class Constable
The Collingwood Police Force (civilian employees)
receives telephone calls and complaints (and make dispatches)
not only for the Town of Collingwood but also for the
Township of Thornbury (The Township of Thornbury has its
own police force but no civilian employee) In other words
the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
discharge some of the civilian functions for both the police
forces - Collingwood and Thornbury For example in 1984
out of 10437 calls logged with the Collingwood Police Force
1822 calls were logged for the Police Force of Thornbury
The civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force belong to the Collingwood Police Association but they
bargain separately and have a separate collective agreement
In the past the parties have generally resolved their
differences mutually and reached to a settlement without
any outside help This is the first time the parties have
-5shy
failed to resolve their differences through negotiations
which led to this arbitration
The Association served the notice to bargain on June
20 1984 The parties entered into negotiations and had
three rounds of bargaining sessions on September 2 October
4 and October 16 1984 However the parties failed to
reach a settlement It is not clear whether or not the
parties sought the assistance of a conciliator to iron out
their differences
It appears that when the negotiations broke down
there were a number of issues unresolved between the parties
It also appears that the parties intended to put all those
unresolved issues before the arbitrator However Const
Cheversspokesman for the Association stated at the outset
of the hearing that the Association was seeking arbitrashy
tion award only on one issue - ie salaries This
statement surprized even the Towns Counsel Mr Bernardo
who had written a brief on a number of issuesi However the
parti~s finally agreed that the only issue before this
arbitrator is of salary for the year 1984 I assume
that all other issues have either been resolved between
the parties or withdrawn by the Association
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
AWARD
The undersigned was appointed by the Solicitor-
General Honourable George W Taylor QC on November
30 1984 pursuant to section 32 of the Police Act RSO
1980 Chapter 381 to act as an arbitrator to hear and
determine all matters in dispute between the parties
relating to their 1984 Collective Agreement negotiations
(Civilian Personnel) The hearing in this matter was held
in Collingwood Ontario on January 21 1985 At the outshy
set the representatives of the parties agreed that the
arbitrator had been properly appointed and that the time
limits prescribed by the Act for the commencement of the
arbitration hearing had been complied with It was further
agreed that I had the jurisdiction to deal with the matters
in dispute It was also agreed that the issues before
this arbitrator are for the Collective Agreement for the
year 1984 ie from 1st of January to 31st of December
1984
INTRODUCTION
The Township of Collingwood is situated in Central
Ontario in the County of Simcoe It is located approxishy
mately 150 kilometers Northwest of Toronto on the shore
-J-
of Georgian Bay The Town of Collingwood covers 82
square kilometers ranking it 4th in the Simcoe area behind
Barrie at 70 square kilometers Orillia at 115 square
kilometers and Midland at 114 square kilometers
The Town of Collingwood has a current population of
approximately 12000 Among the larger employers in
Collingwood are LOF Glass the Collingwood Shipyards
Harding Carpets Daal Specialties (now Bendex Restraint
System) Canadian Mist Distillers Kaufman of Collingwood
Goodyear Hose Plant Goodall Rubber the Town of Collingwood
and the Simcoe County Board of Education Collingwoods
secondary industry of course is tourism
The Town of Collingwood with its Blue Mountains is also a
famous ski resort for the Southern Ontario It draws a
large number of touristsiskiers in winter and campers in
summer from as far south of the border as Michigan and
New York
The Town of CollingwoodPolice Force is consisted of
18 uniform officers and 6 civilians as follows
- -- -- - - -- ----
-4shy
OFFICERS CIVILIANS
1 Police Chief 1 Clerk Stenographer
1 Staff Sargeant 5 Station-Operator-Typists
3 Sargeants
12 First Class Constables
1 Fourth Class Constable
The Collingwood Police Force (civilian employees)
receives telephone calls and complaints (and make dispatches)
not only for the Town of Collingwood but also for the
Township of Thornbury (The Township of Thornbury has its
own police force but no civilian employee) In other words
the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
discharge some of the civilian functions for both the police
forces - Collingwood and Thornbury For example in 1984
out of 10437 calls logged with the Collingwood Police Force
1822 calls were logged for the Police Force of Thornbury
The civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force belong to the Collingwood Police Association but they
bargain separately and have a separate collective agreement
In the past the parties have generally resolved their
differences mutually and reached to a settlement without
any outside help This is the first time the parties have
-5shy
failed to resolve their differences through negotiations
which led to this arbitration
The Association served the notice to bargain on June
20 1984 The parties entered into negotiations and had
three rounds of bargaining sessions on September 2 October
4 and October 16 1984 However the parties failed to
reach a settlement It is not clear whether or not the
parties sought the assistance of a conciliator to iron out
their differences
It appears that when the negotiations broke down
there were a number of issues unresolved between the parties
It also appears that the parties intended to put all those
unresolved issues before the arbitrator However Const
Cheversspokesman for the Association stated at the outset
of the hearing that the Association was seeking arbitrashy
tion award only on one issue - ie salaries This
statement surprized even the Towns Counsel Mr Bernardo
who had written a brief on a number of issuesi However the
parti~s finally agreed that the only issue before this
arbitrator is of salary for the year 1984 I assume
that all other issues have either been resolved between
the parties or withdrawn by the Association
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-J-
of Georgian Bay The Town of Collingwood covers 82
square kilometers ranking it 4th in the Simcoe area behind
Barrie at 70 square kilometers Orillia at 115 square
kilometers and Midland at 114 square kilometers
The Town of Collingwood has a current population of
approximately 12000 Among the larger employers in
Collingwood are LOF Glass the Collingwood Shipyards
Harding Carpets Daal Specialties (now Bendex Restraint
System) Canadian Mist Distillers Kaufman of Collingwood
Goodyear Hose Plant Goodall Rubber the Town of Collingwood
and the Simcoe County Board of Education Collingwoods
secondary industry of course is tourism
The Town of Collingwood with its Blue Mountains is also a
famous ski resort for the Southern Ontario It draws a
large number of touristsiskiers in winter and campers in
summer from as far south of the border as Michigan and
New York
The Town of CollingwoodPolice Force is consisted of
18 uniform officers and 6 civilians as follows
- -- -- - - -- ----
-4shy
OFFICERS CIVILIANS
1 Police Chief 1 Clerk Stenographer
1 Staff Sargeant 5 Station-Operator-Typists
3 Sargeants
12 First Class Constables
1 Fourth Class Constable
The Collingwood Police Force (civilian employees)
receives telephone calls and complaints (and make dispatches)
not only for the Town of Collingwood but also for the
Township of Thornbury (The Township of Thornbury has its
own police force but no civilian employee) In other words
the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
discharge some of the civilian functions for both the police
forces - Collingwood and Thornbury For example in 1984
out of 10437 calls logged with the Collingwood Police Force
1822 calls were logged for the Police Force of Thornbury
The civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force belong to the Collingwood Police Association but they
bargain separately and have a separate collective agreement
In the past the parties have generally resolved their
differences mutually and reached to a settlement without
any outside help This is the first time the parties have
-5shy
failed to resolve their differences through negotiations
which led to this arbitration
The Association served the notice to bargain on June
20 1984 The parties entered into negotiations and had
three rounds of bargaining sessions on September 2 October
4 and October 16 1984 However the parties failed to
reach a settlement It is not clear whether or not the
parties sought the assistance of a conciliator to iron out
their differences
It appears that when the negotiations broke down
there were a number of issues unresolved between the parties
It also appears that the parties intended to put all those
unresolved issues before the arbitrator However Const
Cheversspokesman for the Association stated at the outset
of the hearing that the Association was seeking arbitrashy
tion award only on one issue - ie salaries This
statement surprized even the Towns Counsel Mr Bernardo
who had written a brief on a number of issuesi However the
parti~s finally agreed that the only issue before this
arbitrator is of salary for the year 1984 I assume
that all other issues have either been resolved between
the parties or withdrawn by the Association
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
- -- -- - - -- ----
-4shy
OFFICERS CIVILIANS
1 Police Chief 1 Clerk Stenographer
1 Staff Sargeant 5 Station-Operator-Typists
3 Sargeants
12 First Class Constables
1 Fourth Class Constable
The Collingwood Police Force (civilian employees)
receives telephone calls and complaints (and make dispatches)
not only for the Town of Collingwood but also for the
Township of Thornbury (The Township of Thornbury has its
own police force but no civilian employee) In other words
the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
discharge some of the civilian functions for both the police
forces - Collingwood and Thornbury For example in 1984
out of 10437 calls logged with the Collingwood Police Force
1822 calls were logged for the Police Force of Thornbury
The civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force belong to the Collingwood Police Association but they
bargain separately and have a separate collective agreement
In the past the parties have generally resolved their
differences mutually and reached to a settlement without
any outside help This is the first time the parties have
-5shy
failed to resolve their differences through negotiations
which led to this arbitration
The Association served the notice to bargain on June
20 1984 The parties entered into negotiations and had
three rounds of bargaining sessions on September 2 October
4 and October 16 1984 However the parties failed to
reach a settlement It is not clear whether or not the
parties sought the assistance of a conciliator to iron out
their differences
It appears that when the negotiations broke down
there were a number of issues unresolved between the parties
It also appears that the parties intended to put all those
unresolved issues before the arbitrator However Const
Cheversspokesman for the Association stated at the outset
of the hearing that the Association was seeking arbitrashy
tion award only on one issue - ie salaries This
statement surprized even the Towns Counsel Mr Bernardo
who had written a brief on a number of issuesi However the
parti~s finally agreed that the only issue before this
arbitrator is of salary for the year 1984 I assume
that all other issues have either been resolved between
the parties or withdrawn by the Association
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-5shy
failed to resolve their differences through negotiations
which led to this arbitration
The Association served the notice to bargain on June
20 1984 The parties entered into negotiations and had
three rounds of bargaining sessions on September 2 October
4 and October 16 1984 However the parties failed to
reach a settlement It is not clear whether or not the
parties sought the assistance of a conciliator to iron out
their differences
It appears that when the negotiations broke down
there were a number of issues unresolved between the parties
It also appears that the parties intended to put all those
unresolved issues before the arbitrator However Const
Cheversspokesman for the Association stated at the outset
of the hearing that the Association was seeking arbitrashy
tion award only on one issue - ie salaries This
statement surprized even the Towns Counsel Mr Bernardo
who had written a brief on a number of issuesi However the
parti~s finally agreed that the only issue before this
arbitrator is of salary for the year 1984 I assume
that all other issues have either been resolved between
the parties or withdrawn by the Association
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-6shy
ISSUE - SALARY
The Association has demanded a 10 increase over the
1983 salaries across the board for all civilian employees
The Town on the other hand has offered a 5 increase for
all civilian employees The 1983 salary scale of the
civilian employees is as follows
Effective January i 1983 Annual
CLERKshy STENOGRAPHER
Start $1236000 After 1 year service $1378000 after 2 year service $1520000
Bonus re Intelligence Work 50000
STATION-OPERATOR-TYPIST
Start 1191000After 1 year service 1252500After 2 year service 1 1312500
STATION-OPERATOR
Start 1127000After 1 year service 1184000After 2 year service 1 1241000
It may be pointed out that presently the Collingwood Police
Force does not have any employee in the category of Stationshy
Operator As noted earlier that it has only one employee
in the classification of Clerk Stenographer and five emshy
ployees in the classification of Station-Operator-Typist
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-7shy
THE ASSOCIATIONS POSITION
The Association in support of its claim has argued
that the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force
department are the lowest paid employees among the Georgian
Bay police forces According to the Association the salshy
aries of the civilian employees of the Collingwood Police
Force are 11 to 26 per cent behind the average salaries
of the civilian employees of the other Georgian Bay police
forces
SALARIES 1984
GEORGIAN BAY AREA FORCES
1 Barrie Secretary 1795500Stenographer 1624900Records Clerk 1624900CPIC Operator 1716200
2 Innisfil All Civilian EmployeesStart 1606800After 12 months 1648100After 24 months 17J2000After J6 months 1782J00
J Midland Civilian Radio Operator0-12 months 1186J4712-24 months 1J5J5JO24-over 14J7068
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-8shy
Radio Operator and Records Radio Operator - Clerk 0-12 months12-24 months24-over
StenographerStation-Operator
Clerk-DispatcherStenographerClerk-Dispatcher IIStenographer IIClerk-Dispatcher IIIStenographer III
1617531
123647014035461487191
15488001701700
175270017527001656100165610015667001566700
123600013780001520000
4 Orillia
5 Owen Sound
6 Collingwood( 1983 ) Clerk
StartAfterAfter
Stenographer
1 year2 year
StartAfter yearAfter 2 year
Station-OperatorStartAfter 1 yearAfter 2 year
(Plus 50000 intelligencework)
Station-Operator-Typist119100012525001312500
112700011 84000 1241000
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
---
COLI I NG~OOD IS AVE RAGE FOR GEOHGI AN BAY FORCES
CATEGORY
STEiOGRAPHER (INCLUDES CATEGORIES DESIGNAT~D AS CLERK STENOSECRETARY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CLERK DISPATCHERI (INCLUDES RECORDS
0I CIVILIAN RADIO
OPERATOR RECORDSCLERK STATIONOPERATOR TYPIST CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
CPIC OPERATOR(INCLUDES CIVILIANRADIO OPERATORSTATION OPERATORCIVILIAN EMPLOYEE)
COLI I NGlvOOD PERCENTAGE GEORGI iN BAY DIffERENCE FORCE 1983 5~ 1984 ~IONETJIY DI FfERENCE
1776800 1520000 1596000 180800 1133
1694358 1312500 1378125 316233 2294
1645189 1241000 1303050 342139 2626
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-10shy
Georgian Bay area police forces include
Town Population Civilian Distance fromEmployees Collingwood
Barrie 45000 12 50 km
Innisfil 12000 6 65 km
Midland 12000 5 45 km
Orillia 24000 10 60 km
Owen Sound 19000 5 50 km
Collingwood 12000 6 0
Barrie is the largest city in the Georgian Bay area
with a population of approximately 45000 Orillia is the
second largest town with a population of approximately
24000 However the towns of Innisfil Midland and Own
Sound are more comparable to Collingwood in size of popushy
lation and number of civilian employees
The Association has further suggested that the salaries
of the civilian employees in Collingwood Police Force are
substantially lower than that of the civilian employees
of the other police forces of similar communities in Ontario
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
I
I
-11shy
COM PAR A B L E FOR C E S
I
I
SANDWICH WEST
I PORT HOPE
ELLIOT LAKE I
WALLACEBURG
I
ORANGEVILLE
I COBOURG
CORNWALL I
KIRKLAND LAKE
I
KAPUSKASKING
I TILLSONBURG
I
I
I
I
2100000 shy
1770000
2200000
1600000
1800000
1370000 (1983)
2000000
1620000
2100000
1670000
I
I
I
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-12shy
The Association has further pointed out that the
civilian employees of the Collingwood Police Force are
not merely typists stenographers and clerks as their
titles or classifications indicate Rather they discharge
all civilian functions normally associated with any police
operation According to the Association the civilian emshy
ployees of the Collingwood Police Force in fact discharge
wide range of duties and more onrus functions than their
counterp~rts in other police forces In support of its
contention the Association attached to its brief the state~
ments by the civilian employees of their job description
The Association however did not present any evidence
whatsoever in this regard The Counsel for the Town on
the other hand objected to the accuracy and validity of
those job descriptions
In other words the Association has suggested that
the titles and classifications of the civilian employees
do not reflect the true nature of their duties responsishy
bilities and job functions According to the Association
this has kept their wages lower than their counterparts in
other police forces
I have no doubt that the civil employees of a police
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
- - -- - - --- - - -- - - -- --- -- -
-lJshy
force generally have a higher responsibility and they disshy
charge varied and onrus tasks than the typists and clerks
in a normal business environment The Association may be
correct in its assertion that the titles and classifications
of its civilian members do not reflect the true nature of
their jobs The Association thus indirectly has raised
a fresh issue of reclassification of the civilian employees
The Association may be justified but the issue of classishy
fication however is not before me and I do not wish to
express any opinion in this regard The parties may be
best advised to discuss this issue in the next round of
negotiation if they so desire
It is evident that the classifications of the civilian
employees in the police forces are not uniform throughout
the province as that of the police officers Rather the
classifications of the civilian employees differ not only
from region to region but from town to town Thus it is
difficult to compare the salaries of the civilian employees
of the one force with that of the other with any accuracy
For example in its comparison the Association has comshy
pared CPIC operations in other Georgian Bay forces with
the Station-Operator in the Collingwood Police Force Whereshy
as factually there is not a single Station-Operator in
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-14shy
Collingwood (though a classification exists on paper) and
CPIC functions are discharged by the civilian employees
classified as Station-Operator-Typists
Further according to the information supplied by the
Association Barrie has four classifications of civilian
employees Owen Sound and Midland have three Orillia has
two and Innisfil has only one classification of civilian
employees However it is not clear how many civilian emshy
ployees each force has in different classification of
civilian employees Thus without the information of the
exact number of employees in each classification the classishy
fication and their rate of pay alone does not lead to comshy
parative analysis of civilian force
The Association though has shown a degree of disshy
parity in the salaries of the civil employees in comparison
with some of the forces in Georgian Bay area but it has not
persuaded me that it should be allowed to catch up partishy
cularly in the year of slow growth high unemployment and
economic restraint
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-15shy
THE TOWNS POSITION
The Town has proposed a 5 per cent increase over the
1983 salaries of all civilian employees The Towns proshy
posal of 5 is largely based upon the provision of the
Provincial Restraint Legislation and the Criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario under section 4 of
the Act Further the Town has opposed the Associations
request on the basis of Towns ability to pay increase
in the Consumers Price Index and the recent trend of wage
increases in private and public sector The Town has
justified its offer of 5 increase on the ground that the
Consumer Price Index has increased only 4 from November
1983 to November 1984 Further that the private sector
settlements in Ontario for the last quarter of 198J averaged
J7 for the first quarter of 1984 averaged J8 and for
the second quarter of 1984 averaged 37 In the local area
wage increases (through negotiated settlement) based on
total compensation were around the 5 mark Public sector
settlements in Collingwood based on total compensation for
1984 show the following
Collingwood Police Officers 55
Collingwood Firefighters 55
Outside Workers 47
Public Utilities CommissionInside and Outside Workers 50
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-16shy
The Town has further argued that it has been always
reasonable and fair to the civilian employees of its Police
Force In 1983 the Town has vOluntarily awarded an inshy
crease of $100000 over the 1982 salaries the amount maxishy
mum allowed under the Act
Finally the Town expressed its inability to pay any
substantial wage increase on the ground of the limited
provincial grants In 1984 the police grant according
to the Town was approximately $23900000 Further that
any increase in salaries of the civilian employees in
excess of 5 will result in further tax increases of those
whose limits have been reached
THE PUBLIC SECTOR PRICES AND COMPENSATION REVIEW ACT
The Town justified its proposal for a 5 increase
ln 1984 in large part on the basis of the provincial
governments policy of financial restraint for public
sector employees reflected in Bill 111 the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Act 1983 and the widespread
acceptance of the policy in 1984 public sector wage settleshy
ments in the community covering municipal employees police
forces school board employees and utility employees
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-17shy
Article 4 (1) of the Act authorizes the Treasurer
of Ontario to determine criteria for assessing changes
in compensation in the public sector The criterion
determined by him provides that
The estimated average compensationfor a compensation group on the lastday of the restraint period shouldrepresent either no increase or anincrease of up to 5 in the averagecompensation for the compensationgroup on the last day preceding therestraint period
In a statement to the Legislature on November 8
1983 the Treasurer announced that
We will ensure the continuation ofrestraint by placing clear limitson funding for all public sectorwage increases during the comingyear Our grants and transfers tomunicipalities school boardsuniversities and other publicly-funded institutions as well asallocations for our own civilservants will provide for averagecompensation increases of up to5 per cent for a group
Under Article 10 (1) of the Act every Act or
Regulation that requires or permits an issue that arises
in collective bargaining to be submitted to or determined
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-18shy
by arbitration shall be deemed to include a provision
that the arbitrator shall consider the employers ability
to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal policy
Thus in view of the 5 per cent criterion proshy
mulgated by the Treasurer of Ontario and the provision
of section 10 of th~ Act which requires an arbitrator
to consider the employers ability to pay in the light of
existing provincial fiscal policy it has been urged to me
that I have no option but to limit my award to an increase
in total compensation of 5 per cent This however
raises a fundamental question what limitations has the
Act imposed on the freedom and jurisdiction of an arbitrashy
tor It is not the first time that the question of an
arbitrators authority and jurisdiction in this regard has
been raised The issue was first surfaced in an interest
arbitration Re Thirtv Participating Hospitals and Canadian
Union of Operating Engineers unreported March 1 1984
(Barton) In that award the chairman referred to the
provisions of the legislation and to the criterion esshy
tablished by the Treasurer pursuant to section 4 of the
Act The award does not specifically refer to section 10
and the requirement in that section to consider the employers
ability to pay in the light of prevailing provincial fiscal
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-19shy
policy but it does come to the following conclusion as
to the way in which compensation ought to be determined
under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act in
light of the Public Sector Prices and Compensation Review
Act
Bearing in mind this legislationour position herein is that thiscriterion is an overriding one whichmust dominate our deliberationsand should the Union wish an increasein compensation higher than that setout therein it should specificallymake a strong case for such anincrease
Dealing with an interest dispute under the Police
Act Professor Peter Barton in Re Council of the Corporashy
tion of the Town of Wiarton and Wiarton Police Association
unreported July 10 1984 (Barton) sets out similar
reasoning in the following terms
This criterion is an overridingcriterion at the present time andit is clear to me that should Iwish to go above the 5 figure fortotal compensation I must have goodreasons for doing so
In Re Board of Commissioners of Police for the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and Metropolitan
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-20shy
Toronto Police Association unreported October 25 1984
(Goldenberg) arbitrator Honourable Carl Goldenberg stated
While this requirement imposes anobligation on the arbitrator I donot find that in specifying oneconsideration it precludes thearbitrator from taking account ofother considerations relevant tothe issue which may warrant anincrease in excess of the standardHowever I agree with the majorityaward in the case of Thirty Partishycipating Hospitals and the CanadianUnion of Operating Engineers (March1 1984) that if a union wishes an increase in compensation higher thanthe standard which has been set under Bill 111 it should specifically make a strong case for such anincrease
In Re The Board of Commissioners of Police of the
City of Peterborou~h and Peterborou~h Police Senior Officers
Association unreported October 24 1984 (Swan) PTofessor
Swan discussed at length the impact of the Public Sector
Prices and Compensation Review Act on the scope of arbishy
tral authority and jurisdiction He stated
The Public Sector Prices and Compenshysation Review Act 1983 is not newlegislation in an area hitherto unshytouched by statutory interventionThere are a number of statutory
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-21shy
schemes for interest arbitrationwhich have been in effect for manyyears including that establishedby the Police Act There is noshything in the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act whichpurports to amend any of those preshyexisting statutory schemes exceptfor the additional requirement insection 10 to consider the Employersability to pay in the light ofexisting provincial fiscal policyThat is as I have said an additionalrequirement clearly imposed by thelegislation along with rather thaninstead of the criteria already esshytablished by the primary statute orcreated by arbitrators under themandate of that statute In the caseof the Police Ac~ the criteriaestablished by arbitrators are wellknown and settled at least insofaras any code of criteria establishedby a developing jurisprudence can besaid to be settled Arbitration awardsdecisions on jUdicial review scholarlywritings and the general expectationsof the parties over the years havecreated a set of criteria whicn musthave been known to the legislatorswho passed the Public Sector Pricesand Compensation Review Act 1983Were there any intention to do awaywith any those criteria that couldeasily have been spelled out in thelegislation Moreover were thereeven any intention to make abilityto pay as defined a paramount conshysideration that also could have beenmade perfectly clear in the legislationArbitrators are required in my viewto take the legislation at face valueand do precisely what it requiresnothing more and nothing less What
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-22shy
this legislation requires is a conshysideration of ability to pay in thelight of existing provincial fiscalpolicy That is of course not aconsideration of actual ability topay as arbitrators have consideredthat criterion in the past but anartificial consideration based uponfiscal policy a concept whichdepends upon the political determinashytions of the government of the dayArtifical though it may be howeverit must be considered if an arbitratoris not to be unfaithful to his or herjurisdiction But there is no disshycernible legislative intention thatthat factor ought to become paramountor overriding It must be takeninto account in the same way as theother pre-existing criteria whichconstitute the substantial part of thearbitrators jurisdiction under thelegislation under which he or she actsin this case the Police Act
In other words it is my responsibilityto consider all of the factors normallyconsidered by arbitrators and in adshydition to consider the special abilityto pay criterion established by section10 of the Public Sector Prices andCompensation Review Act It is no partof my jurisdiction to make the kind ofcomparison required under section 4between criteria established by theTreasurer and the effect of thisarbitration award
Recently dealing with an interest dispute under the
Hospitals Arbitration Act in Re Forty-Seven Participating
Hospitals and Service Employees International Union unshy
reported November 151984 (Kruger)the Board of
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-23shy
Arbitration held that In deciding this and other
matters affecting compensation of employees covered by
these agreements this Board must take account of section
10 (1) of Bill 111 as well as of any other factors this
Board deems to be relevant In singling out Bill 111
section 10 (i) we are not suggesting that the employers
ability to pay in the light of existing provincial fiscal
policy is the sole or overriding factor All that Bill
111 requires is that this be considered This Board is
free to consider other relevant factors such as cost of
living changes salaries in comparable occupations in
the private sector the pattern of wage increases problems
in attracting and retaining staff and so on in deciding
on this matter We are also free to determine the relashy
tive weights to be assigned to these factors
COMMUNITY STANDARD AND TREND OF WAGE SETTLEMENTS
It is widely accepted by arbitrators that community
standard is an important factor in determination of salaries
It is clear that the standard accepted by the community
in negotiated compensation increases for 1984 in the public
sector of the Town of Collingwood is 5 or approximately
5 Furthermore as already noted with respect to police
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-24shy
salaries increases outside of Collingwood for 1984 had also
been at or close to 5
In comparison with the police settlements it is of
interest to note that major wage settlements negotiated
in Canada in the first quarters of 1984 the most recent
period for which the figures are available show average
annual effective increases in base rates including estishy
mated amounts from cost-of-living clauses of 39 and
32 in the first and second quarters of 1984 respectively
For Ontario the corresponding figures show respective
increases of 29 and 41 (See Collective Bargaining
Information Report 1984 Pay Research Bureau Ottawa)
Admittedly 1984 has been a year of restraint and the
figures are affected by settlements providing for a wage
freeze or wage cut Nonetheless they are relevant to
the issue before me
The Association has contended that the Town of
Collingwood has the ability as well as the capacity to
pay and it can certainly afford the wage increases reshy
quested by the Association But the Town is refusing to
its request because 1985 is an election year and our
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-25shy
present municipal officials do not want to make any
decision that may prove unfavourable with the electorate
In support of this contention the Association attached
with its brief the newspaper cuttings from Simcoe Report
April 1984 Enterprise Bulletin November JO 198J and
Toronto Star However the Association adduced no evidence
whatsoever in support of its contention about the Towns
ability to pay An arbitrator in my opinion in the
absence of a concrete evidence can not make findings merely
on the basis of newspaper reports and political statements
With greatest respect to the members of the Association
I simply have not found their arguments for their catch up
proposal to be persuasive
The general economic conditions the pattern of
negotiated and awarded settlement and the existence of the
Provincial Fiscal Policy for 1984 restrain me from granting
an increase higher than 5 per cent
Finally the Association has also requested that
failing an increase above the 5 per cent guidelines I
should establish a criteria for future negotiations to
achieve fair and equitable salaries I am afraid I can
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-26shy
not oblige the Association in this regard In my opinion
for an arbitrator to establish a wage criteria for future
negotiations would amount to an interference with the process
of free collective bargaining Therefore I must decline
to do so
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the submissions of the parties and
for the foregoing reasons I award a 5 per cent increase
in salaries of the civilian employees in all the classishy
fications This increase is consistent with many of the
negotiated and arbitrated wage rates for police and civilian
personnel in Ontario
In arriving at the foregoing determination this
arbitrator has had regard to the employers ability to
pay and the total impact costs associated with this award
as required to be done under the provision of the Public
Sector Prices and Compensation Act (1983 Ontario) The
provisions of the previous Collective Agreement are to be
amended and changed in accordance with the terms of this
award
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator
-27shy
I shall remain seized of jurisdiction in this matter
to the extent necessary to resolve any problems which may
arise from the implementation of this award
I wish to thank the representatives of the parties
for their able presentations for the courtesy and assisshy
tance they have extended to me
Dated at Thunder Bay Ontario this 7th day of
February 1985
Arbitrator