Procedural Fairness: Minimum Wage or Minimum Democratic Governance?

This article critically examines the Ontario government announcing in its 2007 budget that it would increase the minimum wage incrementally, the last hike to occur in March 2010. In March 2009, Premier McGuinty met with business leaders in a private, behind closed doors meeting. News of this leaked out revealing that he stated that he might cancel the remaining increases given economic conditions. Pressed by reporters to explain his apparent flip flop, and shamed by the lack of transparency, he reversed himself again saying this: When we talk about the minimum wage, we have to ask ourselves what it is that we owe both our workers and employers. I think clearly we owe them fairness. Our commitment was to get $10.25 an hour one year from now and we will honour that commitment. This article will review the procedural fairness issues arising in this scenario including both the legal definition and the political implications for democratic governance.


Introduction
Dalton McGuinty, former premier of Ontario (2003Ontario ( -2013 and leader of the Liberal Party at the time is known for his regular increments towards the minimum wage earned in Ontario. This could be in response to the relatively stagnant minimum wage set by Mike Harris's Progressive Conservative Government (1995Government ( -2002 and Ernie Eves Progressive Government (2002Government ( -2003 that remained frozen at $6.85. McGuinty's reasoning to have a minimum wage at par with current inflation rates is perfectly legitimate and in fact beneficial for low income families struggling with the rising cost of everyday living.
In the 2007 Ontario Budget, the minimum wage increments were outlined and set to take place in the course of a few years with the final increase from 9.50 to 10.25 set for 2010. McGuinty and his Liberal Government at the time had no concrete perception of the severity of the 2008 financial crash that www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/sssr Studies in Social Science Research Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 17 Published by SCHOLINK INC.
crippled the world economy.

Aftermath of the Great Recession in Ontario
Although Canada was relatively lucky in the aftermath of the Under circumstances such as this, procedural fairness is prevalent to ensure a fair process and fair outcome comes out of the minimum wage debacle.

Procedural Fairness and Ontario's Minimum Wage
"According to the Baker vs. Canada, procedural fairness is" flexible and variable and depends on an appreciation of the context of the particular statute and the rights affected. The purpose of the participatory rights contained within it is to ensure that administrative decisions are made using a fair and open procedure, appropriate to the decision being made and its statutory, institutional and social context, with an opportunity for those affected to put forward their views and evidence fully and have them "I argue that the exercise of discretion by public officials, in order to be accepted as both legitimate and just, must be validated publicly on the basis of its substantive content.3 The apparatus of the welfare state calls up on its officials to make myriad discretionary judgments in the performance of their duties, judgments which shape the social, political and economic fabric of our society" (Sossin, 1994  would have the opportunity to use Section 33 in response to any lawsuits or attempts to reserve his decision. This could be considered procedural unfairness as administrative loopholes such as Section 33 can be seen as an unconstitutional infringement on the rights of Ontarians to have fair access to challenge the government's decisions.

Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper has evaluated and examined the opportunity to ponder concepts which are critical not just in administrative law, that is, in relation to governmental decision making, but also in the context of the broader political, social and economic landscape. It is important to acknowledge Dalton McGuinty's government closed meetings for possibly cancelling the minimum wage increase as procedurally unfair. This essay reviews procedural fairness evaluating the perspectives of Ontarians who are blindsided by a sudden possibility of the minimum wage increase being cancelled. Despite the argument that suggests that the government was considering the cancellation in response to economic difficulties, McGuinty and his government could have easily practiced effective democratic governance and voiced these concerns for the public to give their perspectives and have active participation in the ongoing issues and decisions being made by the provincial government. Ontarians deserve procedural fairness in all aspects of the court and government systems as well as a democratic governance that regularly promotes and practices open forums for everyone to be informed and place their concerns.
McGuinty's actions proved that his government was not thinking of the democratic governance all Ontarians deserve and it is important to understand the importance of procedural fairness and how the process would be applicable and helpful for Ontarians who were not remotely informed of a major change being discussed by the Ontario government.