More than 500 Radio-Canada researchers will finally be compensated 25 years after filing a complaint for salary discrimination with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, it has been learned The duty. The out-of-court agreement between the union and the public broadcaster is not unanimous among employees and ex-employees, who criticize its ultra-confidential nature and deplore payment delays of several months.
“It seems like a state secret for the country’s national security,” Nancy fumes on the other end of the line. In January, the research journalist, like several of her colleagues, received a call informing her that she would be compensated following an agreement reached in August 2023 between her union and the public broadcaster.
She had no memory of the case, which was a quarter of a century old. In 1999, the Syndicat des communications filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, alleging that the public broadcaster’s researchers—mostly women—were victims of gender-based pay discrimination, which violates the Canadian Human Rights Act. It was only after a long legal battle that the parties reached an amicable agreement last summer.
Nancy learned earlier this year that under the agreement, she would receive a reimbursement of more than $2,000 from her employer within 90 days of signing a confidentiality agreement. But she was not given any details about how the amount the Crown corporation owes her would be calculated. She only received the money on Thursday, after several months of delay.
“At the time, I skimmed the letter and signed it. They present it to you as good news, they’re going to give you money. But when I read it again, I said to myself: what’s this story? […] “I don’t understand the secrecy surrounding this whole affair, why did they bring out the army for this? It’s frightening! Especially since we’re talking about the public broadcaster that is supposed to be transparent,” she says indignantly.
The confidentiality commitment, including The duty obtained a copy, prohibits the persons concerned from discussing the agreement or sharing any document concerning it. In the event of non-compliance, they will have to reimburse the amount paid by Radio-Canada and will be held “responsible for any damage suffered”. It is even stipulated that the confidentiality commitment and the receipt “bind [leurs] successors, heirs and assigns.”
Despite this silence, several people wanted to confide in the Duty so that history does not remain in the shadows. On the other hand, they requested confidentiality, fearing reprisals from Radio-Canada.
Opacity criticized
Contacted by The duty, the management of the public broadcaster and the Union of Radio-Canada Workers (STTRC-CSN) — formerly the Communications Union — refused to answer our questions, citing confidentiality clauses included in the agreement. It is therefore impossible to know the exact number of people affected or the total amount that Radio-Canada must reimburse.
In 2009, The duty reported that 543 people were affected by the complaint and that the union estimated at the time that the sums at stake amounted to “several million dollars.”
Does the union believe it has signed an agreement favorable to its members? “The union didn’t estimate anything. He signed a confidentiality agreement which closed a dispute. That’s all,” replied its president, Pierre Tousignant. He also recalls that the union has the authority to conclude agreements with the public broadcaster without having to consult its members upstream.
As for the late payment, Mr. Tousignant referred The duty to Radio-Canada “which is managing the agreement.” The public broadcaster indicated that “everything is following its course” and that it “is working in concert with the union to finalize the processing of these.”
The confidentiality of information contained in an amicable agreement is a common practice, but Radio-Canada employees and former employees deplore having no information regarding the calculation of the amount awarded to them individually.
“It breaks my heart how this is handled. It sickens me! You make us sign something like that… at least fulfill the conditions. […] Am I surprised? No, it’s always like that at Radio-Canada. It’s the corporate culture,” Nancy criticizes.
An opinion shared by several ex-employees who are still waiting for their payment.
“It’s not so much the amount as the way of doing it [qui me pose problème]. […] “Why do you impose confidentiality when it’s public money? It’s pretty undemocratic for a media employer,” Joannie says.
A retired research journalist, she still hasn’t received the $6,000 Radio-Canada owes her, more than six months after signing the confidentiality agreement. “And without a spreadsheet, I have no idea if that includes the amount lost that would have been paid into the pension fund and the interest,” she says.
In addition to criticizing the lack of transparency from her ex-employer, she is angry with her former union for not having shared the parameters of the agreement with its members.
“I don’t have much congratulations to give to the union, no one kept us informed,” adds Emma, another ex-employee who is still waiting for her compensation of more than $2,000. “I asked questions about how this was all calculated, but the person on the line was very evasive. » According to her, it was even thanks to word of mouth that the union was able to find former employees covered by the agreement.
Documents obtained by The duty also show an anomaly in the count of contract and temporary researchers between 1995 and 1998 by Radio-Canada.
Long battle
The duty analyzed more than a hundred documents obtained by access to information law from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
Emails, expert reports, orders for disclosure of evidence, requests for delays and failure of mediation punctuate this legal saga which spanned 25 years.
These documents reveal that Radio-Canada attempted at the time to deny the pay equity problem which affected seven types of jobs mainly occupied by women and which should give rise to salary adjustments, namely radio production assistants. , TV production assistants, subtitlers, librarians, librarians, researchers and researcher-programmersa function found in the English sector.
According to the documents consulted, the Syndicat des communications de Radio-Canada reported these salary disparities as early as 1995. The head of Human Resources at the time raised the possibility of addressing the issue during negotiations for the new collective agreement. However, in 1997, requests on this subject were refused at the negotiating table, which led to the filing of a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 1999.
“Since 1999, when the complaint was filed, our calculations show that at all salary levels, the hourly salary rates of researchers are lower than the hourly salary rates paid to salary group 9 [des techniciens] », Indicates an expert report on pay equity commissioned by the union in 2018 and including The duty got a copy. A difference of more than 13% was notably highlighted in the hourly salary upon hiring between the two professions.
In its complaint, the union requested, in particular, reimbursement of lost wages and social benefits, since 1995. In 2006, a joint exercise was carried out by Radio-Canada in order to rectify the situation in its salary scales.
It should be noted that since August 2021, Radio-Canada has been subject to the new federal law on pay equity. Employers covered by federal regulations with at least 10 employees have three years – until August 2024 – to adopt a pay equity plan which will then be reviewed periodically.
“Before we had no law at the federal level, we had to refer to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when we noticed salary gaps between men and women. With the Charter, a complaint must be filed to initiate the process and the burden of proof falls on the complaining party. There, we have a proactive law which created the obligation not to have salary discrimination and to correct any gaps if they exist. The burden of proof now falls on the employer. This is a major change,” underlines the professor of industrial relations at Laval University, Yves Hallée, who acted as an expert in the case between Radio-Canada and the STTRC-CSN.