The Association of Crown Law Agents (ALOC) and the Ontario Crown Attorneys Association (OCAA) are registering the announced changes and have relied on section 17.1 of their collective agreement, which provides that in 2014, the government announced that as of January 1, 2017, the service threshold for entitlement to benefits after retirement would increase from 10 years to 20 years. and that eligible workers who retire after that date must pay 50% of the cost of benefits. Finally, the Arbitrator found that post-retirement benefits fell within the jurisdiction of an arbitration panel for allocation and found that the Framework Agreement for Retirees did not exclude the scope of Article 17(1). Indeed, he concluded, this meant that retiree benefits were an authorized object for collective bargaining. They also dealt with matters that could be referred to an arbitration panel. The arbitrator then considered whether retirees` benefits fall within the scope of Article 17.1. It rejected the employer`s argument that, because of the lack of negotiation of benefits after retirement, there could have been no intention that such benefits should fall within the scope of Article 17(1). He found that when the previous version of section 17.1 was first included in the collective agreement in 2000, retired lawyers had long received the same benefits as other retired government officials and continue to do so. There was therefore no reason for the associations to address the issue in negotiations. The associations stated that section 17.1 requires that all benefits, including post-retirement benefits, be maintained for the duration of the collective agreement. The fact that benefits for retirees have not been negotiated before and that they have been granted through Council decisions is irrelevant, they said. If the employer wanted to change retirees` benefits, it was required to do so through negotiations. In this context, the associations argued that the framework agreement that regulates collective bargaining between the parties allows for the negotiation of post-retirement benefits and for being referred to interest rate arbitration.

In considering the specific language of Article 17.1, the Arbitrator stated that pensioner benefits were an “existing, specially provided and continuous” benefit within the meaning of Article. There was no doubt that retiree benefits were “present” at the time the current collective agreement was negotiated. They were also made available `specifically` under the corresponding Council Regulation. They also “continued” because no action had been announced or taken at the time of negotiation of the current collective agreement to suspend or modify these benefits. Subject to the agreement of the parties and the terms of this collective agreement, the parties agree that, as long as the terms of this collective agreement are in force, no specific and continuous benefits shall be reduced in matters within the jurisdiction of an arbitration panel. . . .