The construction unions cannot find out what happened with the money in their pension fund administered by the Commission de la construction du Québec (CCQ). They are asking the court on Tuesday for access to explanatory documents. The CCQ pleads that it did nothing illegal.
Five union associations are demanding more transparency from the Commission de la construction du Québec. It was after having documents analyzed by the actuarial consultant Pierre Marcotte that the unions became aware of “irregularities”, they say.
“We asked questions without succeeding in obtaining answers,” says Patrick Bérubé, director general of the Quebec Provincial Council of Construction Trades-International (CPQMC-I). “If we were in the private sector and we were not satisfied with the administrator, we would have the opportunity to change him, he continues. But because we’re stuck at the CCQ in connection with Bill R-20, we can’t do anything. This is why we go to court. »
“We want the money that workers have contributed to their retirement plan to be used to finance their retirement,” says Éric Boisjoly, general manager of the FTQ-Construction. With inflation, it’s disappointing that retirees can’t have indexed pensions. Is it because it’s poorly managed? That’s what we’ll find out if we manage to get more details. »
As of December 31, 2021, the plan had more than 190,000 active participants, more than 171,000 inactive participants and more than 101,000 retirees or surviving spouses, indicates the CCQ’s website.
The five construction trade union associations, four employer associations and the Commission de la construction du Québec will meet this Tuesday at the Superior Court of Quebec to discuss the follow-up to a request filed in 2020 by the unions.
For 30 years, the costs of administering the construction workers’ private insurance plan were paid for with money from their pension plan. This procedure was modified in 2022.
The law provides that the CCQ is the administrator of the employee benefit plans and that it can charge the plans for its administrative expenses, explains Pierre Marcotte, employee benefits advisor at Marcotte Information. “When we look at the annual reports and dissect the financial statements, we see what is charged to the various plans (pension plan and insurance plan), he raises, and the expenses charged to the pension plan turn out to be too high. »
“It’s a trust and we’re not supposed to pay anything other than what is necessary to administer the trust,” maintains Pierre Marcotte.
“The money belongs to the workers, we collect it for the workers, it is supposed to go into the fund of the workers’ pension plan and go out for an expense of the pension plan, period”, adds Claude Tardif, lawyer at Rivest Schmidt, who is defending the trade unions in this case.
“We want to have details”
“As provided for in the Civil Code, we want to have details,” continues Pierre Marcotte. We want to have supporting documents to verify that everything paid is justified. We occupied so many square feet in the building and it costs so much per square foot? We are not able to have that. We are charged 25% of the accounting department, but did we really use 25%? This information is not disclosed. »
Unlike other pension plans, there is no independent committee that manages that of construction workers, explains Pierre Marcotte. It is the CA of the CCQ, of which the unions are a part, which takes care of it.
The unions are therefore demanding financial information and that the amount charged without right to the pension plan be reimbursed to the pension plan fund. A loss estimated at 110 million dollars. The amount of the scheme currently stands at 28 billion.
Nothing illegal, says the CCQ
In its plan of argument filed in court, the CCQ explains that it did nothing illegal. The CCQ is not required to reimburse anything, she says, since she has complied with all applicable laws and rules. The CCQ adds that “this way of doing things is the one that has prevailed for at least 30 years, without any objection from the plaintiffs and other signatory parties to the collective agreements”.
Regarding the request for financial information, the CCQ is of the opinion that “the questions raised by the applicants concerning the administration of the Pension Plan are only a pretext” to obtain “a monetary condemnation against the CCQ in connection with payment of administration fees.
The CCQ did not wish to comment on the case because it is before the courts.
Winds of change in 2018
For 30 years, unions, employers and the CCQ were aware of the procedure, which had never been questioned. In 2018, newcomers to the board of directors, Éric Boisjoly, general manager of the FTQ-Construction, and Michel Trépanier, president of the CPQMC-I, wanted to change the procedure and claim that we tried to muzzle them.
In 2021, the CCQ applied to the Superior Court to exclude Éric Boisjoly and Michel Trépanier from the CCQ’s board of directors because of legal proceedings against the CCQ regarding the pension plan.
“As part of these actions, we attack the questions of the pension plan in the construction industry, the ways of doing things of the CCQ and its very mission, hence the conflict of interest”, indicates the document filed in court. The eviction request was denied.