Labour and Employment Law

168

The Impact of the New Pay Equity Act on Employers Under Federal Jurisdiction

Although the Canadian Human Rights Act recognizes the right to pay equity, wage differences between men and women still exist. Such was the focus of the Pay Equity Act [the Act], adopted by the federal Parliament on December 13, 2018, and the accompanying Pay Equity Regulations, which will implement a proactive pay equity regime applicable to both public and private sector employers under federal jurisdiction and with at least 10 employees. As of August 31, 2021, when the Act becomes effective, employers will be held to a careful appraisal of their compensation practices and to award the pay increases required to compensate the differences between salaries paid to men and women for work of equal value.

The current regime of complaints under s 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act will remain applicable to employers under federal jurisdiction with less than 10 employees.

Pay equity plan

At the core of this new regime is the pay equity plan that employers will have to establish and update periodically. The plan will allow finding and fixing gender-based compensation gaps for predominantly female job classes. Employers will have to establish a plan within three years of the date on which they became subject to the Act. Employers with 100 or more employees, or whose employees are totally or partially unionized, will have to establish a specially appointed pay equity committee. Employers with less than 100 employees, all non-unionized, may also voluntarily establish a pay equity committee, in which case the Pay Equity Commissioner will have to be notified. Ms. Karen Jensen, a member of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, has already been designated in anticipation of the coming into force of the Act.

Composition of the pay equity committee

A pay equity committee is composed of at least three members, at least two-thirds of whom must represent the employees to whom the pay equity plan relates; 50% or more of the members must be women. At least one member must be a representative of the employer. With unionized employees, each bargaining unit may designate one member to represent it. The committee must also include at least one member selected by the non-unionized employees.

Establishment and operation of the pay equity plan

To establish a pay equity plan, the employer, or the pay equity committee, if one has been appointed, must:

  1. Identify the various classes of positions in the workplace and determine for each one the dominating gender (male or female) if any, and the value of work for each category, under the criteria provided for in the Act;
  2. Calculate the compensation for each predominantly female or male class;
  3. Compare the compensation of both classes for work of equal value to reveal any difference in compensation between both classes.

Following this, employers must post their draft pay equity plan for a period of 60 days, to allow employees to make comments on the draft; those comments will have to be considered by the employer, or the pay equity committee, in the establishment of the final pay equity plan.

The final version will have to be posted within three years of the coming into force of the Act: employers will then have to increase the compensation of all predominantly female job classes that, according to the plan, receive compensation inferior to that paid to predominantly male classes. The increase will be payable on the day following the posting of the plan, at the latest. Note that certain employers will be allowed to phase in the increases for a period of three to five years if the increase represents more than 1% of their payroll.

In a unionized context, in the event of an inconsistency between the pay equity plan and the collective agreement, the plan will prevail. Increases that the employer will have to pay will be deemed to be incorporated into the collective agreement.

Update and maintenance of the pay equity plan

After its initial implementation, employers, or pay equity committees, will have to update the plans every five years, to compensate any discrepancy that could arise, ensuring that pay equity will persist. Updating the plan basically involves performing the same steps as the establishment of the initial plan every five years after that plan was established.

The few lines above provide a summary of a complex regime that could generate costly obligations for employers. As it will soon come into force, we recommend that all employers consult with a qualified advisor to help them ascertain whether the Act applies to them and prepare an adequate response.

168

Articles in the same category

No Notice of Default, No Termination

In Pavage Wemindji Inc. v. Compagnie de Construction et de Développement crie ltée, the Quebec Superior Court emphasized that a valid notice of default (mise en demeure) is not just a formality—it’s a precondition to exercising remedies like contract termination in many cases under Quebec civil law. The Decision The plaintiff, Pavage Wemindji Inc. (“Wemindji”), […]

Public Contracts: When Does a Penalty Clause Cross the Line?

Penalty clauses are a practical tool for owners: instead of having to prove actual losses when a contractor falls short, they can rely on a pre-agreed sum. For contractors, however, the stakes are equally significant — a lump-sum penalty can consume a substantial portion of the contract’s value. Still, the mechanism has its limits. Courts […]

Not So Intelligent!

Since the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence tools, growing concerns have emerged regarding their use in judicial proceedings. Recent decisions have relied on section 342 of the Code of Civil Procedure to sanction parties who make improper use of such tools. More specifically, this provision has been invoked on several occasions to address the use or citation […]

So? Is it settled or not?

In an interim decision in Djaferian v. Spanoudakis,rendered on February 20, 2026, the Superior Court had to determine whether an offer made 15 months earlier, prior to the institution of proceedings, could still be accepted and result in a transaction. Summary of Facts and Timeline The Plaintiff, a co-owner who sustained water damage to his private […]

Office Parties and the Employer’s Duty to Prevent Harassment

In De Sousa and Corporation interactive Eidos, 2026 QCTAT 4, the Quebec Administrative Labour Tribunal (ALT) appears to have broadened the scope of an employer’s obligation to prevent harassment. The decision arose from a complaint filed by a former employee who had been sexually assaulted at her home by a colleague following an office party organized by the […]

Should Economic Losses Be Considered Property Damage?

The Quebec Court of Appeal in Zurich, Compagnie d’assurances SA c. CRT Construction inc., recently overturned the Superior Court’s decision on the interpretation of a construction insurance policy. Facts CRT Construction Inc. (“CRT”) was retained by the City of Montreal (“City”) to perform major construction work at the Atwater water treatment plant. At the City’s request, CRT […]