banner image

Creating A Weighting Formula

​​ ​​PDF Version​​icon_pdf.png​ [ 682 Kb / 34 pages | Download Adobe Reader ]

Disclaimer: This Kit is for information only, and is not intended to restrict Review Officers or the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal in their determination of matters. Refer to the Pay Equity Act for exact interpretation.

This publication is available in MS Word as a fillable accessible document on request from the Pay Equity Office by email at

This section will help you create an appropriate job evaluation (JE) system that suits the content of all the jobs in the workplace, and can capture job information as well as value the work.

Cre​ating a Point Value System

This method provides a ration​​​​al distribution of points for your job evaluation system, because it reflects your organization's values. Remember, these values are determined by the weighting you assign to the four factors of skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions.

Once your system has been created, this same system will be used to evaluate all of your job classes.

The following is a step by step instruction to help you determine the point value for each level in your evaluation system. You will need to use Template 5 and Template 6​ of the Mini-Kit.

The Point Formula

Decide the total number of points for your system. The majority of systems use 1,000 points to make calculations easier. Therefore if a job class was rated at the top level for every sub-factor in the system, the total points for that job class would be 1,000.

Step 1: Determine the percentage for each factor (Template 4)

Take the percentage for each factor and multiply it by 10 to determine the points assigned to each factor.

Example: If skill is weighted at 35% of the system, then the total points would be 350 (10 × 35 = 350 points)

Step 2: Distribute the percentage allotted for each across your sub-factors (Template 4)

Take the percentage for each sub-factor and multiply it by 10 to determine the points assigned to each sub-factor.

Example: If communication skill is weighted at 10% of the system, then the total points would be 100 (10 × 10 = 100 points).

Step 3: Determine the total points for each level (Template 4)

Divide the total number of points assigned to each sub-factor by the number of its levels.

Example: If communication skill has 100 points, divide 100 by the number of levels (4). Each level is assigned 25 points.

Level 1 = 25 points

Level 2 = 50 points

Level 3 = 75 points

Level 4 = 100 points

If the sub-factor had 5 levels, then the total points for each level would be 20 points.

Step 4: Shade up or down when you need more flexibility (Template 5)

This system provides flexibility by allowing levels to be shaded up or down. Use the "+" or "−" factor to rate job classes that do not fit the definition of the sub-factor's level.

Example: if a job class fits best in Level 2 under the Communication skills sub-factor, but on occasion the person doing this job has to provide explanations on complex material, the job class may be scored properly at Level 2+.

To calculate points for the "+" or "−" factor, divide the number of points allotted to Level 1 by 3, and add or subtract that amount.

Example: If each level of the Communication Skills has 25 points, divide 25 by 3.

The "+" or "−" factor is 8.3 points. Add or subtract that amount from the appropriate level.

Note: You will need to round off your numbers.

To work out the point formula for your workplace, use Template 5 to insert the factor and sub-factor percentage weights and to calculate points for each sub-factor's level.

Job Evalua​tion System

To create an appropriate job evaluation system that suits the content of all the jobs in the workplace and can capture job information as well as value the work.

This Guide contains master templates for an 11 sub-factor Job Evaluation system (Template 6) as well as Rating Sheet on (Template 7).

Remember to print one set of Job Rating Sheets for each job class in your organization and attach the job data used to value the job classes.

Enter all evaluation results on Template 8 of this Mini-Kit to create a Master Summary Rating Sheet.

Ratin​g Results & Comparisons

The Rating Results & Comparisons (Template 9​) contains a summary of the evaluation of each job class and will identify the male job comparators for the female job classes.

Two methods to compare jobs

The Act directs employers to use either or both of the two comparison methods for achieving pay equity for female job classes:

  • Job-to-Job
  • Proportional Value.

Pay equity is achieved when a female job class is paid at least the same as a male job class of equal or comparable value. Equal or comparable value means similar, not necessarily identical, in value.

Method 1: Job-to-Job Comparisons/Direct comparisons

With the job-to-job comparison method, male comparator job classes of "equal or comparable" value need to be identified for each female job class. Job rate (pay and benefits) comparisons shall be made only between the female job classes and their male comparator job classes.

Different methods can be used to identify female and male job classes of equal or comparable value, such as: job clusters and banding. For more information refer to the Guide to Interpreting Ontario's Pay Equity Act​.

Under the job-to-job method, there may be unmatched female job classes – that didn't find a male comparator. If pay equity can't be achieved using job-to-job, then the proportional value method of comparison must be used for those unmatched female job classes.

Method 2: Proportional Value Comparisons/Indirect comparisons

Proportional value is a method of indirectly comparing female and male job classes and is used to provide pay equity for female job classes or any unmatched female job class under the job-to-job method.

Pay equity is achieved using the proportional value method of comparison when every female job class is compared to a representative group of male job classes.

Employers are required to look at the way male job classes are paid in the organization by examining the relationship between the value of the work performed and the compensation received.

To achieve pay equity using the proportional value method, employers must:

  • Select a representative group of male job classes;
  • Establish the relationship between job values and job rates;
  • Compare female job classes to male pay pattern
  • Determine job rate
  • Calculate retroactive pay equity adjustments where necessary; and,
  • Adjust job rates for female job classes where necessary

(Pay equity is achieved when the relationship between the value of the work performed and the compensation received is at least the same for female as for male job classes.)


Employers that did not implement pay equity according to the deadlines have to conduct pay equity job evaluations and comparisons as if these tasks were completed on time and, if necessary, make payments retroactive to the applicable deadline.

Maintaining Pay​ Equity

Maintenance is the means by which an employer ensures that compensation practices are kept up-to-date and remain consistent with pay equity principles. Subsection 7 (1) imposes an obligation on an employer to establish and "maintain" compensation practices that provide for pay equity. Subsection 7 (2) prohibits employers and unions from agreeing to compensation practices that if implemented would result in a contravention of 7 (1).

Once pay equity is achieved:

  • Review job classes to capture substantial changes to job duties and responsibilities;
  • Evaluate new female job classes using the same system;
  • Assess the creation or the loss of male job classes used as comparators;
  • Assess changes to compensation…to name a few.


Publications and Tools

Guide to Interpret​ing Ontario's Pay Equity Act​

Interactive Job Compariso​n Tool for Small Business

Create a Weighting Formula

To contact the Pay Equity Offic​e

Send your questions to:
Or Telephone: 416-314-1896 
Toll-free: 1-800-387-8813​

Previous | Next

ISBN 978-1-4606-1994-0 (HTML)
ISBN 978-1-4606-1993-3 (PRINT)
ISBN 978-1-4606-1995-7 (PDF)