Arbitrator denies grievor's claim for pension contributions during period of termination of employment
December 17, 2025
.png)
An arbitrator has denied a grievor’s claim that her employer should pay the grievor’s share of contributions to purchase service during the period between the grievor’s termination of employment due to frustration of contract and subsequent reinstatement, and instead ordered the employer to facilitate the purchase of the service.
The grievor was employed with the Timmins Police Service (the “Service”) as a police officer beginning in 2010. In July 2017, she was unable to continue working due to post-traumatic stress disorder. The grievor’s employment was terminated due to frustration of contract in January 2020, but she did not discover that her employment was terminated until February 2022. The Timmins Police Association (the “Association”) grieved the termination in October 2022 and the grievor’s employment was reinstated voluntarily by the Service in March 2023. The grievor did not accrue any pension credits under OMERS (the pension plan under which the Service is a participatory employer) for the period from termination of employment to reinstatement (the “Termination Period”).
The Association claimed under OMERS that the Service should pay the grievor’s share of contributions that would be required to purchase pension credits for the Termination Period, as well as the Service’s matching contributions, because (1) the gap in pensionable service was due to the Service’s improper decision to terminate the relationship, and (2) the grievor did not have the money to make her contributions. The Service submitted that there was no basis in law to require the Service to pay the grievor’s share of contributions to purchase the service but made clear that Service was willing to pay its contributions in respect of the Termination Period if the grievor made her contributions, as required by the terms of the OMERS pension plan.
The arbitrator noted that had the grievor been employed by the Service through the Termination Period, she would have made her contributions to the pension plan and the Service would have matched them. There was no entitlement under the collective agreement to indicate that the Service, in any circumstance, would be responsible for making the grievor’s contributions. As a result, the arbitrator found that there was no basis on which the Service was required to pay the grievor’s contributions during the Termination Period.
The arbitrator ordered the parties to inquire with the plan administrator about whether pension credits in respect of the Termination Period may be repurchased. If so, and subject to the grievor’s express agreement and direction, the Service was ordered to remit the grievor’s share of contributions necessary to purchase the pension credits and the Service’s matching contributions to the plan.
Click ‘More Information’ below to review the decision:
.png)
.png)
