Canadian Wage Law and Employee Relations Incident 9-1

Incident 9-1 describes the mistakes made with the compensation administration with Reynolds Plastic Products. With respect to the compensation administration, a variety of laws are being violated. For example, the Canadian Human Rights Act describes how it is completely illegal to discriminate against employees based on sex, such as gaining or denying employment, or to limit the application of employment based on sex, as stated in sections seven and eight. However, the exact incident with regards to discrimination of sex at Reynolds Plastics has to do with section 11 of the human rights act, which dictates, "11. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for an employer to establish or maintain differences in wages between male and female employees employed in the same establishment who are performing work of equal value" (canlii.org). This is clearly being violated in the case described at Reynolds Plastics when it was stated that, "To make matters worse, two recently hired female machinists complained that they were paid less for the same work than their male colleagues" (canlii.org). This clearly demonstrates discrimination based on sex which implies an unfair workplace for women. Such practices point to the fact that this company is an inhospitable place for women to work, as it favors men, and sees no problem in denying women equal pay for the same amount of work.

These facts and implications are even more...

This is again and illegal practice and discriminatory. As chapter four in the class textbooks describes, in 2005 an entity known as Statistics Canada found that on average women earned 85 cents for every $1 earned by a man. While they offered up a variety of reasons for why this might be, it still comes down to the fact that discrimination in the workplace is consistently practices against women when it comes to pay equity. As the chapter four explains, in Canada, the Human Rights Acts prohibits discrimination based on sex, making it illegal to pay women less that men if their jobs are of the same value, which brings up the equal pay for work of equal value. Another area of violation as described in the case with Reynolds Plastics, is that according to Canadian Law, overtime pay must equal one and a half times the rate of regular pay. At Reynolds Plastics, it is not clear if that rate was upheld; furthermore, overtime pay must be given to employees for all time over 40 hours per week; at Reynolds Plastics, it was given only at all hours over 180 per month.
The problems with incentives for executive, production workers, sales people and hourly employees was that the means of compensation seemed very arbitrary and often…