This text is part of the special Syndicalism booklet
The Fédération interprofessionnelle de la santé du Québec (FIQ) is continuing its fight for pay equity, while criticizing the government’s lack of openness. The union deplores having to negotiate to obtain pay equity, which is nevertheless imposed by law.
25 years after the adoption of the Pay Equity Act, the problem of the wage gap between men and women remains far from resolved. “The law has allowed for improvements, but differences persist between predominantly male jobs and predominantly female jobs,” observes Julie Bouchard, President of the FIQ. Nearly 90% of the 76,000 members of this union are women.
In February 2019, the Institute for Socio-Economic Research and Information (IRIS) revealed that in Quebec, only civil servants and personnel in the health and education networks had seen their purchasing power drop since then. 2000. This decline of 1.8% marked a striking contrast with the average increase of 11% during the same period in the municipal and federal administrations, the university sector, public enterprises and the private sector. However, the fields of health and education are made up of a large majority of women, unlike the others.
Another example: in Quebec, compensation in the public sector remains 16% to 35% lower than in the private sector, federal and municipal administrations and public enterprises. This sector has 74% women, compared to 55% in federal public administrations, 37% in public enterprises and 35% in municipal administrations. As if there was need to add to it, the Institut de la statistique du Québec again recalled in March 2021 that professional women earn approximately $4 per hour less than professional men, both in private companies. than in the public sector.
Correct discrepancies
“These considerable differences clearly show that the types of jobs that are predominantly female are systematically less valued and less well paid than similar jobs in predominantly male fields,” maintains Julie Bouchard. However, we do not sense a strong will from the government to solve this problem. »
In particular, the FIQ contests the government’s habit of including, during negotiations, its proposals relating to pay equity in its envelope devoted to all salary increases. “Pay equity is a completely separate issue,” says the president. It is a matter of law and should not be subject to bargaining. “It just has to be applied correctly. The FIQ calls for regular, transparent and joint discussions on the issues concerning this law.
Maintaining pay equity is one of these issues. The Pay Equity Act provides for a maintenance exercise every five years, in order to monitor and correct new pay disparities. In 2018, an important judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada stipulated that salary adjustments resulting from these exercises should be retroactive to the time the discrimination appeared. Before that, the wage correction only started when the imbalance was noticed.
The government therefore passed a law in April 2019 to comply with the Supreme Court judgment. However, this legislation, now being challenged in court by several unions, makes it possible to pay lump sums to employees rather than retroactive salary increases. “These amounts are not taken into account in pension funds, salary insurance, maternity leave and other such allowances; they do not represent real retroactivity,” says Julie Bouchard.
Lack of openness
The FIQ deplores the government’s rigidity and lack of openness. “This government does not like to consult too much, regrets Julie Bouchard. Very often, we learn of his decisions when he announces them publicly. Since the start of the pandemic, discussions with the government have been rather difficult. »
She gives the example of the bonuses offered to health care workers. The government first introduced “COVID bonuses” and then others aimed at staff retention. Everything was announced by ministerial orders, without any real negotiation with the unions. The very rigid and not always clear rules surrounding these bonuses have caused a lot of discontent on the ground. They also sometimes created divisions, since two colleagues in the same department did not necessarily have access to the same bonuses.
“This government is used to going it alone,” says Julie Bouchard. But if we could have frank and transparent discussions about the issues, we would be able to find much more effective solutions, without wasting time fighting in court, as has been the case too often in recent years. »