Well, we would certainly like to include them both, because, you know, on the pay equity side you have the retroactivity and you have got the ongoing adjustments that have to be made. If we are going to do a collective agreement effective April 1st, we want to maximize the dollars to our female staff that historically have had a pay equity inadequacy. So, all we are saying is, on one side you have retroactivity, on the other side you have the ongoing costs. We would hope that we could come to some agreement with that. That is one of the reasons. There are a number of others, why we tied them together. I am still optimistic. I have not seen Miss Simpson's Eye on the Ledge or her comments, but our bargaining committee have instructions from me to try to link both issues so that we can get the maximum benefits that are affordable to our staff into their hands as quickly as possible and so that this does not go on and on and on. Our staff have waited for ten years. This is a ten-year issue. Both Mr. Voytilla and myself want to solve it. We want to get money into the hands of our staff that rightly belongs to them that this government can afford. Therefore, we would like to link them both and get on with concluding an agreement.
John Todd on Committee Motion 5-13(5): Resolution Of The Public Service Act Amendments Issues
In the Legislative Assembly on January 28th, 1998. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 5-13(5): Resolution Of The Public Service Act Amendments Issues
Item 20: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
January 27th, 1998
Page 396
John Todd Keewatin Central
See context to find out what was said next.