OAR Position: Vote Against The Proposed Binding Arbitration Framework (BAF)

June 9, 2017

Vote Against The Proposed Binding Arbitration Framework

Securing a binding arbitration framework (BAF) that is fair to all doctors is essential to the future of our profession.  The OAR believes that it is incumbent on all doctors to ensure that the BAF methodology is done correctly and that it protects the rights of all OMA members.  Please consider all the facts when voting on the proposed BAF.  Online voting is open until Saturday, June 17, 2017.

Historically the OAR has remained a strong proponent for the right to binding arbitration and the OAR Board commends the efforts of the negotiating committee and the new OMA Board for its efforts in obtaining a proposed framework. 

However, the OAR Board of Directors believes that the proposed BAF, as it currently exists, is not constructed to meet the needs of current and future radiologists practicing in Ontario and cannot support it without significant changes that address the concerns listed below.

Having a binding arbitration process without a fair and formal internal dispute resolution process, and a guarantee to respect minority rights is problematic! 

And, a separate mechanism is needed for subgroups of physicians who may not share a “community of interest” with others to establish separate negotiations and exercise the flexibility to substitute a different bargaining agent, if needed. This is a principle that has long been incorporated in legislation!

Leading constitutional labour law expert, Mr. Andrew Lokan, has identified a number of significant weaknesses and concerns with the proposed BAF that could leave all Ontario doctors in a vulnerable and dangerous position. These issues go beyond what one would normally expect to see in a BA framework and the OAR urges all doctors to carefully consider these facts and the risk they pose, when voting on the proposed Binding Arbitration Framework:

  1. The perpetual entrenchment of the OMA as the exclusive bargaining agent for all Ontario physicians with no alternative mechanism if this BA model does not work.
  2. The OMA’s exposure to internal conflicts within the profession arising from it playing a co-management role with MOH for the Physician Services Budgets and expenditures.  In order to protect the interests of subsets of OMA members there must be an internal dispute resolution mechanism within the OMA!
  3. The permanent entrenchment of Mediation/Arbitration with the same Chairperson, versus having the roles divided to ensure greater transparency.
  4. The unusual inclusion of specific criteria for arbitration, including the permanent inclusion of relativity as an item while being silent on other issues of key interest to doctors such as the restricted entry of new medical graduates.

To read Mr. Lokan’s memo outlining his views, Click Here:

To read Mr. Lokan’s response memorandum to the Goldblatt Partners, Click Here:

Click Here to Vote Now

The future of our profession depends on your vote!   VOTE NO!