IN THE MATTER OF AN INTEREST ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO THE HOSPITAL

LABOUR DISPUTES ARBITRATION ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.14, AS AMENDED

B E T W E E N:

ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 336

(Hereinafter referred to as “the Union”)

AND:
EMPIRE CROSSING RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
(Hereinafter referred to as the “Employer”)

BOARD OF ARBITRATION: Norm Jesin - Chair

Helen Nowak - Union Nominee
Carla Zabek - Employer Nominee

APPEARANCES:

For the Union: Karen Marchesky - Research Officer

Leslie Sanders - Staff Representative
Michelle Langlois - Campaigns Officer
Arlene Anderson - Research Assistant
Mackenzie Tripp - Bargaining Committee
For the Employer: Ryan Wood - Bass Associates
Blair Bonnell - Director of Labour
Katy Tranter - Interim General Manager

HEARING DATE: February 7, 2022

EXECUTIVE SESSIONS: February 15, 2022 and March 18, 2022

DECISION RENDERED: April 13, 2013

AWARD:
This award is for a renewal collective agreement. This will be the third collective

agreement between these parties. The parties were unable to agree on the term for the

agreement. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the Hospital Labour Disputes

Arbitration Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 14, as amended (hereinafter HLDAA), the collective agreement

will be for a two year term effective from January 1, 2021 until December 31, 2022.

This Board of Arbitration was constituted under HLDAA to settle the terms of this

collective agreement. The parties agreed that the Board was properly appointed and had

jurisdiction to decide this matter.

The Employer operates a retirement residence in Port Hope, Ontario. The facility provides

retirement residences for both independent and assisted living. The facility consists of 64 units
with a capacity for 128 residents. The bargaining unit consists of 8 full-time and 23 part-time

employees.

In reaching its determination in this matter the Board has considered the usual criteria

considered by arbitration Boards including the criteria set out under HLDAA.

Having regard to the foregoing and the submissions of the parties the Board awards that

the collective agreement will consist of the prior collective agreement as amended by the items

already agreed on together with the additional items awarded herein as set out below:

1. Wages:

Wages are to increase by 2% in each year with adjustments (ie., catch-up) added in

accordance with the following wage grid as set out below:

Expiry Jan 2021 Jan 2021 Jan 2022 Jan 2022

2% 1% 2% 1%
(2% for
D/A/C/RPN)
RPN Start 19.87 20.27 20.67 21.07 21.28
475 hrs 20.15 20.55 20.96 21.38 21.59
1875 20.42 20.83 21.24 21.67 21.88
3750 20.70 21.11 21.54 21.97 22.19
PSW/Cook/Activity Start 15.46 15.77 15.93 16.25 16.41
Aide 475 hrs 16.01 16.33 16.49 16.82 16.99
1875 16.28 16.61 16.77 17.11 17.28
3750 16.56 16.89 17.06 17.40 17.58
Dietary/Attendant/ Start 14.00 14.28 14.57 14.86 15.01
Concierge 475 hrs 14.28 14.57 14.86 15.15 15.31
1875 14.42 14.70 15.00 15.30 15.46
3750 14.57 14.86 15.15 15.46 15.61
Maintenance Start 18.04 18.40 18.58 18.96 19.15
475 hrs 18.04 18.40 18.58 18.96 19.15
1875 18.04 18.40 18.58 18.96 19.15
3750 18.04 18.40 18.58 18.96 19.15
2. Article 20.02 – Life Insurance:

The Life Insurance benefit is increased to $20,000.00.

3. Article 20.03 – Payment in Lieu:

The payment in lieu benefit is increased from 15 to 25 cents.

4. New Article 23 – RRSP:

The Union proposal for a new matching RRSP benefit with a 1% contribution level is

awarded.

5. New Article 16.06 – Premiums:

The Union’s proposals for new weekend and shift premiums are awarded in part. A shift

premium of ten cents ($0.10) per hour as well as a new weekend premium of ten cents

($0.10) per hour are awarded for work performed within the hours set out in the Union’s

proposal.

6. New Article 16.07 - Responsibility Pay:

The Union’s proposed Article 16.07 is awarded.

7. Bereavement Leave:

The Union’s proposal for increased bereavement leave is awarded.

8. Letters of Understanding and Housekeeping Items:

The Union’s proposed Articles 16.04, 16.05 and 16.06 are awarded.

9. Wages are retroactive to the dates indicated above. All other items awarded are effective

on the date of release of this award unless otherwise indicated herein. All proposals not

expressly dealt with herein are denied.

 10. We remain seized until a collective agreement is signed.

Dated at Toronto, this 13th day of April 2022.

____________________
Norm Jesin, Chair

I dissent in part (See attached).

__________________________________
Helen Nowak, Union Nominee

I dissent in part (See attached).

________________________________
Carla Zabek Employer Nominee
 Dissent of the Union Nominee

The terms of the expired collective agreement were far behind comparators in the sector and the
evidence clearly demonstrated there was a significant retention and recruitment issue at the home.
While I was glad to see improvements in compensation in a number of areas, including wages, much
work still needs to be done. This home remains notably behind sectoral norms on key terms of
employment, most notably benefits. In the next round of bargaining I would expect the parties to focus
attention on bringing employees up to normative standards for retirement homes.

___________________

Helen Nowak

Union Nominee

Dissent of Employer Nominee:

With respect, I have some concerns with the award.

Given that this is only a third collective agreement, the award is overly generous (i.e., introduction of a
new matching RRSP, wage adjustments to all job classes, increases to part-time in lieu, introduction of
shift and weekend premiums, introduction of responsibility pay and improvements to bereavement
leave). I do not see how the principle of total compensation was appropriately considered. This is only a
two-year collective agreement. Short term collective agreements do not attract more generous
compensation increases, to the contrary.

In other retirement home awards and settlements, outside of the industry standard increases to wages,
there were minimal other compensation increases. As such, the total compensation improvements in the
award far exceed the retirement home awards, and thus ignores the replication principle.

Moreover, awards in the retirement home sector clearly demonstrate that the wages and compensation
levels within that sector vary widely and are heterogenous by nature. There is no industry standard and
catch up is not awarded even in mature bargaining relationships.
Although the Chair did not award a health and welfare benefit package as requested by the Union, I would
not have awarded both the introduction of the RRSP and special wage adjustments or both premiums.

Respectfully submitted,

Carla Zabek