Unions fighting WRHA clawback of overpayments to employees

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 02/11/2017 (2954 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The head of the health-care union fighting the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority over its attempts to claw back accidental overpayments says it is not about the money.

Bob Moroz, president of the Manitoba Association of Health Care Professionals, says the union’s grievance stems from the WRHA’s move to unilaterally deduct money from an employee’s paycheque – before giving them a chance to review the evidence and ascertain whether they were actually overpaid.

“We don’t have the right to keep money that’s overpaid,” Moroz said. “They do have a right to recover a valid overpayment, provided they follow the terms of the collective agreement.”

The health authority has had issues with over- and underpayments for several years, although interim president and chief executive officer Réal Cloutier said the accuracy of the WRHA’s payroll system is “very high quality.”

According to the WRHA, payroll for the region’s roughly 59,000 employees is done monthly, with errors occurring in less than one per cent of the cases (or for about 75 people). More often than not, the issue is of underpayment. Between Jan. 1 and Sept. 30, the WRHA underpaid employees to the tune of $3.2 million, although such errors are often corrected during the same pay period.

But in a smaller selection of cases, the health authority overpays its workers. During the first nine months of 2017, the WRHA overpaid employees by nearly $650,000. Already, it’s managed to recoup three-quarters of that money – although 433 employees still owe and have yet to enter into some form of repayment agreement.

That’s the case for dozens of employees included in MAHCP’s grievance and many more included in a separate grievance filed by the Manitoba Government and General Employees’ Union.

In MAHCP’s case, an arbitrator found in its favour last month, and ordered the health authority return unilateral overpayments until an agreement is reached in each case. Cloutier said the WHRA has stopped the deductions, although it is appealing the decision.

In MGEU’s case, arbitration is scheduled for two days in May. However, a spokeswoman said it could be many months after that before a decision is reached.

“Legitimate overpayments should be returned to the employer in a reasonable time frame… We believe the WRHA is not following the collective agreement properly and in many cases is looking at unreasonable time frames to recoup overpayments,” she said.

“We think the fact that overpayments continue to be an issue shows the inadequacies of this payroll system being able to meet the demands of a workforce like the WRHA, which has numerous schedules and pay scales.”

Moroz said he believes some of the errors involving those represented by MAHCP might stem from the fact many employees work part-time at more than one facility — which can lead to issues with the system thinking someone has been overpaid, when really they are working at different locations.

The grievance was filed, he said, when letters about deductions went out earlier this year, saying if the employee didn’t meet the WRHA’s timeline, deductions would begin. MAHCP and the WRHA disagree on whether the authority has always been allowed to unilaterally deduct money.

Cloutier didn’t speak specifically on the grievance, noting only the WRHA is contesting it. However, he said the authority works carefully with each individual employee to make sure the repayment plan is appropriate.

“We don’t want to create undue hardship for the individual,” he said, “but we also have to recognize that these are public funds and if they were not earned by the individual, they do need to be repaid.”

jane.gerster@freepress.mb.ca