The Squeeze

We received notification from the co-op indicating that they had revised subsidy calculations for those members receiving OW/ODSP to allow them greater credits for their utility costs. This revision is based on a CMHC estimation and not on individual member's utility bills. If a member feels that the credit is not in keeping with their actual utility costs, the member may submit copies of their utility bills for a 12-month period. The co-op will also ask other members in the same unit size to submit their bills so that a proper comparison can be made - all of this on a voluntary basis. The problem with this approach is that not all units of the same size are the same - some are in worse shape than others. Also, one must factor in how many people live in the unit and how many hours per day the members are at home. To potentially wait for volunteers to submit copies of their utility bills before a greater credit can be granted for one's own utilities, is a stonewalling tactic to me.

The above approach is more or less in keeping with a bulletin from CHF Canada dated October, 2008, instructing co-ops to abide by the Ontario Human Rights Commission's decision in the case Iness vs. Caroline Co-operative Homes. While CHF stated that same-size units should be given identical credits, they also stated that if members could demonstrate higher utility costs for their particular unit, they would receive additional credit. This is technically different from our co-op's position, in that members would perhaps have to wait for other members to volunteer their energy costs before allowing that member a greater credit.

CHF also stated in their bulletin that members must be allowed an insurance credit for their personal belongings, should they have such a policy. Our co-op has chosen to ignore this credit.

My concern is that the watering down of the Ontario Human Rights Commission's decision in the case of Iness vs. Caroline Co-operative Homes will soon be purposely driven into the ground.