Newfoundland court allows financial crisis to delay pay equity.ST. JOHN'S, NL -- The Supreme Court of Newfound new·found adj. Recently discovered: a newfound pastime. Adj. 1. newfound - newly discovered; "his newfound aggressiveness"; "Hudson pointed his ship down the coast of the newfound sea" and Labrador backed the provincial government in using a financial crisis to justify putting off pay equity payments to female health-care workers, even though the move violated their equality rights. The Supreme Court of Canada The Supreme Court of Canada (French: Cour suprême du Canada) is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeal in the Canadian justice system.[1] has yet to rule on a similar case concerning expensive treatment for autistic autistic /au·tis·tic/ (aw-tis´tik) characterized by or pertaining to autism. children. The B.C. government has appealed two lower court decisions ordering it to pay for the $60,000-a-year therapy. The arguments were on constitutional grounds. The decision of the Newfoundland court had unanimous support of the judges. The ruling affects about 5,000 current and past women employed by the province. In 1991 the Newfoundland government deferred pay equity payments because of its financial problem. Newfoundland argued it had to defer de·fer 1 v. de·ferred, de·fer·ring, de·fers v.tr. 1. To put off; postpone. 2. To postpone the induction of (one eligible for the military draft). v.intr. the pay adjustments, originally agreed to in 1988, to stave off stave n. 1. A narrow strip of wood forming part of the sides of a barrel, tub, or similar structure. 2. A rung of a ladder or chair. 3. A staff or cudgel. 4. Music See staff1. a money crisis that threatened the province's credit rating. Sheila Greene, lead counsel for the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees claims "governments now have carte blanche CARTE BLANCHE. The signature of an individual or more, on a while. paper, with a sufficient space left above it to write a note or other writing. 2. In the course of business, it not unfrequently occurs that for the sake of convenience, signatures in blank are to put cash ahead of the charter", and that this will set a precedent for claiming financial hardship when dealing with the claims of women, the disabled, aboriginals and other minorities. The justices stated that governments will be able to use this argument only in exceptional situations. The ruling said the courts will "continue to look with strong skepticism at attempts to justify infringements of charter rights on the basis of budgetary constraints. To do otherwise would devalue the charter because there are always budgetary constraints." |
|
||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion