News details

Connection







Lost password?

Latest news

Applying the Jordan framework: Are courts placing too much of the burden on the defence?
Applying the Jordan framework: Are courts placing too much of the burden on the defence?

In R v. Jordan, the Supreme Court put a hard cap on the duration of criminal trials — sending a thrill of panic through the justice system in the process. The ruling is roughly two and a half years old now. Time for the training wheels to come off.Now, that backlog of pre-Jordan charges has been largely cleared — the transitional period is over. But Crown and defence lawyers alike report that trial times aren’t speeding up; statistics cited in a recent Law Times article show that in the Ontario Court of Justice, average times to disposition and the number of court appearances have not diminished since Jordan. If the SCC intended the ruling as a salutary shock to the system, it didn’t work.So what happens now?

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-12-18
RCMP’s forensic firearm testing backlog adding delays to justice system

The RCMP’s forensics labs are taking nearly four times longer to analyze firearms than they did just four years ago, adding delays to a criminal justice system under pressure to speed up after a recent Supreme Court decision.

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-12-16
Court delays persist, despite Jordan
Court delays persist, despite Jordan

The Supreme Court of Canada decision in Jordanand the problems it tried to address are still top of mind in the criminal courts in Ontario nearly two-and-a-half years after it was released.

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-12-03
The performance pay saga reaches a settlement
The performance pay saga reaches a settlement

The issue is the prorating of performance pay in relation to pre-promotion period for the year in which lawyers are promoted. If a lawyer was eligible for performance pay and was promoted during the year, the Employer, rather than pay out a prorated performance pay for the period pre-promotion, paid out nothing at all regardless of your performance rating for the year. The AJC originally filed a grievance in 2011 and in response to that grievance, TB had conceded in the context of the adjudication hearing that pre-promotion service should be recognized. Unfortunately, the adjudicator originally disregarded TB's concession in his decision of 2015, requiring the AJC to file an application for judicial review, which eventually resulted on December 22, 2016 in a remedy limited to the right to pre-promotion performance pay for the year 2010-2011. Thus, the AJC filed another policy grievance on July 27th 2016. The hearing was scheduled for October 2018. We are pleased to announce that we now have a signed Memorandum of Settlement on this matter with TB.  

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-10-30
Not all Questions are Good Questions: Avoiding Discriminatory Interview Practices
Not all Questions are Good Questions: Avoiding Discriminatory Interview Practices

Much ink has been spilled over a recent decision by the Commission de la fonction publique (the "Commission") on the topic of discriminatory interview practices. In Association des procureurs aux poursuites criminelles et pénales et Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales[1], the Commission found that the plaintiff had been discriminated against when she was denied a position due to her pregnancy.

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-10-11
Federal government facing pushback over bill to transform justice system
Federal government facing pushback over bill to transform justice system

One thing that both the prosecution and the defence seem to agree on is that the federal government’s push to cut preliminary inquiries in most criminal cases will not solve the long-standing problem of delays in the criminal justice system.

[ ...More ]
Publication date : 2018-10-01


<-- Back to archived news

The performance pay saga reaches a settlement

30-10-2018

A quick recap:  The issue is the prorating of performance pay in relation to pre-promotion period for the year in which lawyers are promoted. If a lawyer was eligible for performance pay and was promoted during the year, the Employer, rather than pay out a prorated performance pay for the period pre-promotion, paid out nothing at all regardless of your performance rating for the year. The AJC originally filed a grievance in 2011 and in response to that grievance, TB had conceded in the context of the adjudication hearing that pre-promotion service should be recognized. Unfortunately, the adjudicator originally disregarded TB's concession in his decision of 2015, requiring the AJC to file an application for judicial review, which eventually resulted on December 22, 2016 in a remedy limited to the right to pre-promotion performance pay for the year 2010-2011.   


Notwithstanding that the wording on eligibility was not restricted in time under the performance pay provisions of the collective agreement, the AJC found itself forced to re-litigate the question once again. 


Thus, the AJC filed another policy grievance on July 27th 2016 . The hearing was scheduled for October 2018.   


We are pleased to announce that we now have a signed Memorandum of Settlement on this matter with TB.   While we consider this another win for team AJC, we can't help but be concerned with the time it takes for us to see our relentless efforts bear fruit in the face of the systemic access to justice problems as they relate to scheduling delays at the FPSLREB, the interpretation issues that departments have been creating without first obtaining interpretation or application direction from TB and the time it takes for TB to turn its mind to resolving issues mere hours or days before a scheduled hearing. Like our fight on standby duty, this one has taken us 8 years to resolve in your favour.   


Now that TB has agreed, performance pay will be paid to all lawyers who are promoted within a year and who meet the requirements for the payment of performance pay before being promoted, on a pro-rated basis from April 1st of that year to the date immediately preceding the promotion, retroactive to 2011-2012.   


This means that further pay adjustments to those who were promoted since 2011-2012 are in order.   


Like you, we do wonder why this policy grievance was even necessary, but assure all our members that we will continue to hold the employer to account for as long as it is required.   


We would like to thank all the members who assisted the AJC in providing the facts to make our case. 


Next steps are set out in the Memorandum of Settlement and require the drafting of a communique to be issued to all those affected.   Please stay tuned as more information will follow. 


Should you have questions regarding this settlement, please contact your regional Governing Council representative.

 

https://ajc-ajj.net/news/article/791/The-performance-pay-saga-reaches-a-settlement/