Harkin v. Attorney General

Harkin v. Attorney General

Complainants failed to establish a prima facie case under ss.7 and 10 because unequal pay for work of equal value at the federal level must be established pursuant to s.11 and the CHRC Guidelines by an establishment-specific job evaluation; the PSSRB is a separate establishment, no such internal study or comparative s.11 analysis was conducted, and therefore the Tribunal could not find discrimination or extend the Consent Order or PE settlement to PSSRB employees.

Citation
2010 CHRT 11
Parties
Complainants: Richard Harkin et al.; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Attorney General (Canada)
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint (pay Equity) / Decision Tribunal Hearing Concluded
Outcome
Complaint dismissed; not substantiated
Legal Topics
Pay Equity, Establishment, Separate Employer, Section 7 CHRA, Section 10 CHRA, Section 11 CHRA, Prima Facie Burden, Retroactive Equalization Payments
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Employment Law Pay Equity Administrative Law Establishment Separate Employer Section 7 CHRA Section 10 CHRA +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Harkin et al.

Complainants

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Attorney General (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint (pay Equity) / Decision Tribunal Hearing Concluded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complainants established a prima facie case of adverse differentiation under s.7(b) CHRA
  2. 2 Whether complainants established a prima facie case under s.10(a) CHRA
  3. 3 Whether pay equity claims can be pursued under s.7 or s.10 rather than s.11

Ratio Decidendi

Complainants failed to establish a prima facie case under ss.7 and 10 because unequal pay for work of equal value at the federal level must be established pursuant to s.11 and the CHRC Guidelines by an establishment-specific job evaluation; the PSSRB is a separate establishment, no such internal study or comparative s.11 analysis was conducted, and therefore the Tribunal could not find discrimination or extend the Consent Order or PE settlement to PSSRB employees.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed; not substantiated

Orders

  • Complaint dismissed