Service statement

A board of directors formed of five persons representing the employers (The Association of Quebec Building Service Contractors Inc) and five persons representing the employees (The Service Employees Union, Local 800) governs the Parity Committee.

The Board meets every month and discusses the preoccupations of the employers and employees in order to find concrete solutions to the problems of the cleaning services industry.

The personnel of the Parity Committee is formed of inspectors, office employees, an assistant director and a director. Their task is to advise you and to simplify your task by clearly explaining what are your rights and obligations.

The inspectors make regular visits to the employers at their place of work and to employees on their work sites.

An inspector is available during office hours to answer requests for information and to take complaints or denunciations from employers and employees.

These operations may bring corrections in the application of the Decree or lead to more in-depth inquiries. The inspectors issue claims to employers who do not respect the Decree and may recommend pursuing them in court.

The office employees insure the follow-up of all files concerning the employers and employees of the cleaning sector. They verify if the Decree is well applied by examining the monthly reports filed in by the employers.

The office employees also answer your questions, see to the good running of all activities and send information to every person in the industry. They insure a technical support in the issuing and collection of the claims.

The Parity Committee does not receive any financing from the Government. It finances itself with a levy of 1% on all salaries, divided equally between employers and employees: 0,5% deducted directly on the employee’s pay and that amount is matched by the employer. Each month, the employer calculates and sends the levy of 1% to the Parity Committee.
(Section 22 i – Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees and Regulation respecting the levy)

All the activities of the Parity Committee are under the supervision of the Direction des politiques, de la construction et des décrets of the Minister of Labour of Québec. Each year, an inspection is performed to examine the budget, financial report and the annual report of activities.
(Sections 23, 25, 26 – Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

To apply the Law, the Parity Committee has the power to penetrate any place of work and place of business of an employer.
Of course, this must be done during reasonable hours.
(Section 22 e, Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

The Parity Committee has the right to examine the pay register and may also require the production of any document relating to the application of the Decree. For example, the Parity Committee may require the invoicing from the employer’s sub-contractors as well as the bank statements and the returned checks of the company (see Interpretation and jurisprudence to know more).

It has the right to exercise the recourses in favour of the employees, impose a 20% fee on all amounts claimed and make any settlement, compromise or transaction deemed expedient. Furthermore, the Parity Committee may impose penal fines in case of violations of the Decree.
(Sections 22 a, b, c, d, e – Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

The Parity Committee may also personally sue the administrators of a company in cases where it is impossible to collect from the company.
(Section 22 a, Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

The Parity Committee must investigate and verify the application of the Decree. It must consider any complaint from an employer or employee respecting the carrying out of the Decree.
(Section 24 – Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

It must obtain compensation in cases where the Decree is not applied. Thus, when no agreement is possible concerning a claim in favour of an employee, the Parity Committee must undertake the legal procedures required.
(Section 22a- Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees)

The Parity Committee also gave itself a mission of informing all employers and employees on their rights and obligations, to serve the principal cultural communities in their language and to be a centre of reference for all the cleaning services industry.

The purpose of the Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees is to provide decent working conditions in certain work areas where the employees are more vulnerable.

The documents required during an inspection, as provided by article 22 of the Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees, have a commercial character. The possibility of having access to some more personal elements is not relevant considering the reasonable nature of the powers allowed to the Parity Committee by the Law.

The requirement to provide the bank statements and returned checks to the inspector is in accordance with the function of the Parity Committee of verifying the respect and application of the Law. The spirit of the Law is to give the inspectors the powers required to achieve their tasks.

The Interpretation Act (R.S.Q., chapter I-16) states that:

“Such statute shall receive such fair, large and liberal construction as will ensure the attainment of its object and the carrying out of its provisions, according to their true intent, meaning and spirit.”

Moreover, in a recent decision, Judge Johanne White, of the Quebec Court, had to answer these two questions:

01-Is the employer required to provide to the inspector the returned checks for the last three months?

02-Does the administrative nature of the inspection, as well as the fact that the employer was not suspected of acting contrary to the law, justifies the employer’s refusal to provide the checks requested by the inspector?

To these questions, the judge answered clearly that it does not belong to the employers to decide which documents are needed for an inspection. Moreover, the lack of reasons to suspect any infringement to the law does not justifies the employer’s refusal to provide the documents needed by the inspector within the framework of his inspection.

Jurisprudence:

Comité paritaire vs. Can-Jan inc.
Cour du Québec, June 23, 2004, Mme la juge Louise Villemure

Comité paritaire vs. Groupe Laberge inc.
Cour du Québec, April 23, 2004, M. le juge Louis Rémillard

Comité paritaire vs. Les services d’entretien Bo-Lav inc.
Cour du Québec, September 24, 2010, Mme la juge Johanne White

The employer cannot call upon the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms to refuse an inspection. In the judgment “Comité paritaire de l’industrie de la chemise vs. Potash” (1994), the Supreme Court of Canada answered the two following questions:

01-Are the provisions of paragraph e) of article 22 of the An Act Respecting Collective Agreement Decrees which grants powers of inspection, incompatible with article 8 of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms?

02-On the assumption that the Court would answer the first question by the affirmative, can these provisions be justified within the framework of the first article of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms?

The Court concluded that the powers of inspection envisaged within the Law do not violate the charter.

In this decision, the Court compares all the powers of inspection to seizures or searches within the meaning of the Charter. However, the appreciation of the abusive character of these powers can vary according to whether it is about the criminal or statutory field.

Compared to the collective agreement decrees, the Court estimates that the powers of inspection are sufficiently circumscribed by the Law and that they are not abusive.

Consequently, the Court did not have to fall back on article 1 of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms to evaluate if it were a reasonable limit whose justification can be shown within the framework of a free and democratic society.

The professional employer, the employer or the customer cannot limit the inspectors to certain places such as the cafeteria, the rest room, the lobby or others.

The inspector has the right to go to see the employees where they work.

Jurisprudence :

“the appellant employer was found guilty of having refused access to the workshops where the employees work to the inspector of the Comité paritaire du bois œuvré. He only enabled him to meet them in the employee’s cafeteria.

It is justifiably that the first judge concluded that the inspector has a right of general access to the places of work, allowing him even to observe, if he wishes it, an employee working with his machine.

The inspector cannot check the nature of the work and the product manufactured to determine the subjectivity of the employer to the decree if he is confined to the cafeteria of the company to question the employees.

The “places of work” indicate all of the company, including the workshops. Moreover, the English version of article 33 uses the words “the place where the work is being done”, which confirms the interpretation that the Court gives to the French version”.

Cuisirama Inc,vs. Comité paritaire du bois œuvré du Québec.
Superior Court, Joliette, 4 juillet1991
Judge Yves Mayrand, D.T.E. 911 T 835

An employer cannot call An Act Respecting the Protection of Personal Information in the Private Sector to refuse to give to the Parity Committee the information requested concerning the names and co-ordinates of the contractor, its subcontractors or its employees, as well as any information envisaged with the An Act Respecting Collective Agreement Decrees or with the decree.

Article 18 of “An Act Respecting the Protection of Personal Information in the Private Sector”, deals with the communication of information to third parties.

Article 18. “A person carrying on an enterprise may, without the consent of the person concerned, communicate personal information contained in a file he holds on that person.”

1- to his attorney;

2- to the Attorney General if the information is required for the purposes of the prosecution of an offence under an Act of applicable in Québec;

3- to a person responsible, by law, for the prevention, detection or repression of crime or statutory offences who requires it in the performance of his duties, if the information is needed for the prosecution of an offence under an Act applicable in Québec;

4- to a person to whom it is necessary to communicate the information under the law or a collective agreement, who requires it in the performance of his duties.