IN THE MATTER OF AN INTEREST ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO

THE HOSPITAL LABOUR DISPUTES ARBITRATION ACT

Between:

REVERA ARNPRIOR VILLA

(the “Employer”)

- and -

SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION,

LOCAL 1 CANADA
(the “Union”)

Re: FOR THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT FROM

DECEMBER 1, 2020 TO NOVEMBER 30, 2022

Board of Arbitration

Peter Chauvin Chairperson

Brian O’Byrne Employer Nominee
Douglas Wray Union Nominee

Appearances for the Employer:

Ryan Wood Legal Counsel

Janice McIlquham Executive Director
Amy Rezek Director, Labour and Employment

Appearances for the Union:

Aleisha Stevens Legal Counsel

Brian Chang Research Lead
Francis Allard Union Representative

Interest Arbitration conducted on January 10, 2022

Executive Session held on January 11, 2022
 1

AWARD

[1] The Union and the Employer (“the Parties”) agree that this Board of Arbitration has been duly
constituted pursuant to the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. H 14, as amended
(“HLDAA”) to resolve the terms of the renewal of their collective agreement that expired on November
30, 2020. The Parties have not agreed upon the term for their renewal collective agreement.
Accordingly, pursuant to the HLDAA the term of their renewal collective agreement is from December
1, 2020 to November 30, 2022 (“the Collective Agreement”).

[2] The Employer is a private retirement residence located in Arnprior Ontario, about 45 minutes
west of Ottawa. It has 81 suites and employs about 12 full-time and 10 part-time and casual bargaining
unit employees in the classifications of Activities Aide, Cook, Cook Lead Hand, Dietary Aide,
PSW/Resident Health Care Aide, UCP (Shift Supervisor), Housekeeping, Maintenance and RPN.

[3] The Employer was certified by the Union on December 23, 2006. Since then it has had four
collective agreements. The most recent was a five-year collective agreement that expired on November
30, 2020 that was achieved by way of a voluntary settlement.

[5] Notice to bargain for this renewal Collective Agreement was given on September 2, 2020.
Bargaining occurred on March 23, 24 and 25, 2021. Conciliation occurred on March 25, 2021. A no
board report was issued on May 31, 2021. This interest arbitration was conducted on January 10, 2022,
and an executive session was held on January 11, 2022.

[6] In determining the outstanding issues, the Board has been guided by the legislative criteria set
out in the HLDAA, including the following:

1. The employer’s ability to pay in light of its fiscal situation.

2. The extent to which services may have to be reduced, in light of the decision or award, if
current funding and taxation levels are not increased.

3. The economic situation in Ontario and in the municipality where the hospital is located.
4. A comparison, as between the employees and other comparable employees in the public and
private sectors, of the terms and conditions of employment and the nature of the work performed.

5. The employer’s ability to attract and retain qualified employees.

 2

[7] In addition to considering and applying these statutory criteria, the Board has also considered
and applied the principles of “replication” and “total compensation” in attempting to replicate what
these Parties, in a free strike/lockout bargaining environment, would likely have been able to achieve
under the prevailing circumstances. Those circumstances include, among others, the economic
conditions during the term of the Collective Agreement.

[4] The Parties had somewhat different views as to what the most relevant comparators are. The
Union submitted that the most relevant comparators are retirement residences across Ontario that have
collective agreements with the SEIU, and in particular Revera retirement residences that have collective
agreements with the SEIU. The Employer submitted that retirement residences with any employer or
union, but in the Ottawa area, are more relevant comparators, because wages and terms of employment
tend to be lower in the Ottawa area. The Board finds that other Revera retirement residences in the
Ottawa area that have collective agreements with the SEIU are the most relevant (but not the only)
comparators, noting the following passage from HCN-Revera Lessee (Fergus Place) GP and LIUNA,
Local 300, 2020 CanLII 84502 (ON LA) [bolding added]:

20. In terms of the relevance of comparators, we note the most relevant comparators are
those that most closely mirror the situation before the interest arbitration board, which
would include similar type facilities with similar employee classifications working in
similarly situated communities. The provincial landscape must also be given consideration,
particularly in this sector. However, in our view particular attention must be given to similar
facilities in the same geographical area and especially those facilities owned or operated by
the same employer and those facilities where employees are represented by the same union.

[5] The Parties have placed several issues before this Board of Arbitration. The Employer
submitted that many of the Union's proposals are not warranted on an individual basis, and that the
Union's proposals cumulatively are excessive, taking into consideration the concept of total
compensation. The Employer submitted that very few of the Union's proposals should be granted.

[6] The Union submitted that its proposals are reasonable and should be granted because the wages
and other terms of employment at the Employer are significantly lower than the wages and terms of
employment at other retirement residences across Ontario. The Union seeks to rectify that in two ways.
First, the Union requested special wage increases, in addition to the general wage increases, for all of
the job classifications to bring the wages closer to, but not relatively equal to, the wages at the other
retirement residences. Second, the Union also requested that we award other new or improved
provisions that will also bring the employees of this Employer closer to the terms of employment
existing at other retirement residences. Importantly, the Union submitted that these lower wages and
 3

terms of employment have caused the Employer to have significant difficulties in recruiting and
retaining employees. The Union submitted that its proposed special wage increases and new or
improved other terms of employment are necessary to enable the Employer to successfully recruit and
retain employees in the future.

[7] The Employer submitted that its wages and terms of employment are not lower that the most
relevant comparators, which are the other retirement residences in the Ottawa area. The Employer
submitted that the wages and terms of employment in the Ottawa area are traditionally and consistently
lower than the wages and terms of employment elsewhere in Ontario. The Employer submitted that
when these Ottawa area competitors are considered, it becomes clear that the wages and terms of
employment at the Employer are not generally lower than the wages and terms of employment of the
other Ottawa area comparators. As such, the Employer submitted that that special wage increases and/or
new or improved other provisions are not warranted and should not be granted. Also, and based on this,
the Employer submitted that its wages and terms of employment are not lower than the local norms, and
as such have not caused it to have difficulties in recruiting and retaining employees.

[8] The Parties placed before the Board, and the Board has considered, numerous settlements and
arbitration Awards pertaining to other retirement residences. Taking this, and the Parties’ detailed briefs
and submissions into consideration, the Board awards the following.

General wage increases:

Effective December 1, 2020 - a 2% general wage increase across all classifications

Effective December 1, 2021 - a 2% general wage increase across all classifications

Special wage increases:

Effective December 1, 2020 - a 1% special wage increase across all classifications

Retroactivity on these wage increases – The Board grants the following:

The retroactivity amounts granted on the general and special wage increases above are to be paid
by separate cheque or separate direct deposit to current employees within three full pay periods of
the date of this Award. Persons who worked in the period from December 1, 2020 onwards, but
who are no longer employed, will also be entitled to payment of retroactivity. The Employer is
directed to send a registered letter within three pay periods of the date of this Award to the last
known address of each such ex-employee, advising them of their right to retroactivity. Ex-
employees will have 60 calendar days from the date of mailing to claim payment. Ex-employees
 4

who fail to claim their payments within the 60-day period shall be deemed to forfeit any claim
thereto.

NEW - Article 17.xx - Night shift premium - The Board grants the following language that was
proposed by the Union, and a fifteen cents ($0.15) per hour night shift premium:

(a) The Employer will pay a night shift premium of fifteen cents ($0.15) per hour for every full
hour worked commencing at or about 23:00 hours and that end at or before 07:00 hours.

NEW – Article 17.xx - Weekend premium - The Board grants the following language that was
proposed by the Union, and a ten cents ($0.10) per hour weekend premium:

(a) The Employer will pay a weekend premium of ten cents ($0.10) per hour worked payable
between the start of the shift commencing on or about 23:00 hours Friday and the end of the shift
ending on or about 23:00 hours Sunday.

Article 22.01 - Vision care benefit – Increase to:

Vision care benefit of $250 per person every 24 months is included with reimbursement at 100%.

Article 22.01 - Payment in lieu of benefits – Increase to:

The Employer shall pay twelve cents ($0.12) per hour on the hourly rate of pay of all part time
Employees in lieu of Health and Welfare Benefits.

Article 22.03 – Pension plan– Increase to:

Each Eligible Employee covered by this Collective Agreement shall contribute from each pay
period an amount equal to three percent (3.0%) of applicable wages to the Plan. The Employer
shall contribute on behalf of each Eligible Employee for each pay period, an amount equal to
three percent (3.0%).

[9] Unless otherwise stated, the terms that have been granted in this Award are effective on the first
day of the second full payroll following the date of this Award. Any of the Parties’ proposals that have
not been specifically granted above have been not granted by the Board. The Parties are directed to
prepare and execute their renewal Collective Agreement, which will consist of the expired collective
agreement, except as modified by this Award, and by the terms previously agreed to by the parties
during their negotiations, all of which is incorporated into this Award.
 5

[9] The Board remains seized of this matter in accordance with Section 9(2) of HLDAA until the
renewal Collective Agreement has been signed by the Parties.

Signed at Toronto on January 31, 2022.

______________________________
Peter Chauvin, Arbitrator

I dissent, in part
__________________________
Brian O’Byrne, Employer Nominee

Partial dissent, attached

_____________________________
Douglas Wray, Union Nominee

UNION NOMINEE - DOUGLAS WRAY – PARTIAL DISSENT

For reasons that are not clear to me, the terms and conditions of employment in retirement homes in this
geographic area (Ottawa and the Ottawa Valley), regardless of union affiliation, are low. There does not
appear to be any economic or labour relations rationale for this state of affairs. The problem I see with
giving most weight to local comparators in this case is to perpetuate inequity and disparity in
comparison with industry standards. In these circumstances, I believe relevant provincial comparators –
SEIU agreements - ought to be accorded greater weight.

The Award represents a small step forward in addressing certain issues. However, there are two issues
in particular where I do not believe the Award goes far enough: Special Wage Increases and Pension.

In my opinion, more than a 1% Special Wage Increase is necessary and justified. It appears to me that
the additional wage increases are needed to deal with recruitment and retention problems. With respect
to Pension, in my view the Union made a compelling case for increasing the pension contribution to 4%
- if not immediately, then certainly before the end of this contract. I am concerned that since increases in
pension contributions are not made retroactive, the invariable (and justified) increase to 4% will be
unnecessarily delayed for these employees.

The terms of the collective agreement awarded by the Award will expire November 30, 2022. The
parties will very shortly need to address these and other pressing issues.