Voting at a special general meeting (SGM) on November 29 that could have axed the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA)’s contentious pending insurance plan for all realtors in the province wound up determining that the program will go ahead as planned.
It’s a blow — although not an unexpected one — for the significant percentage of dissenting member boards across the province up in arms about the mandatory aspect of the plan, including those who’d banded together to pressure OREA into having the requisitioned meeting around the Ontario Realtor Wellness Program (ORWP).
“The motions that would have ended the ORWP were defeated 73 to 59 with 29 abstaining,” states Tim Hudak, CEO of OREA. “This year, member boards have twice voted in favour of the ORWP, and (the latest) result means we will continue to move forward with bringing the ORWP to all members on January 1, 2024 … We remain committed to keeping members informed.”
Concerned boards’ objective not to derail program
OREA insists that there’s no possibility of making the ORWP optional. The association made it clear in advance of the SGM that the program would be terminated if voting went against it. The concerned boards maintain that their objective has never been to completely derail the program though — it’s recognized by all involved that many realtors in the province would benefit from the safety net it provides.
The main issue all along has been that the plan will be mandatory as well as a condition of OREA membership, even for those who already have insurance, or who will receive little or no benefit from the ORWP due to other factors.
TRREB carries nearly half the votes and say
Being the largest board in the province by far, the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) has almost half the votes in the assembly of Ontario boards, making it tough to beat. The TRREB voting delegation, on balance, has been in favour of the ORWP. This is why the boards that hoped the SGM would spark change and greater accommodation weren’t surprised not to have their objectives approved, despite widespread support.
“We needed to ensure that we followed the correct governance procedures before considering any other actions,” explains Bill Duce, CEO of the Waterloo Region Association of Realtors (WRAR), which was among the boards requesting the SGM. “Our members have been very vocal that the majority are not interested in this program for a variety of legitimate reasons … We believe they should have a choice.”
What now?
With the bylaw options now pretty much exhausted, any next steps for dissenting boards would be in uncharted territory. “What now?” is the million-dollar question, Duce asserts. “No doubt there will be some deep discussions about where we go from here.”
Says David Puddy, president of the Simcoe & District Real Estate Board: “Some boards may decide not to participate and may withdraw from OREA. That is a long and complicated process that would not be taken lightly.”
There may be a large number of older realtors “who retire rather than be forced into a plan that has reduced benefits after the age of 65 but still requires full payment,” Puddy continues.
In his view, “The value of OREA and the confidence of the members in its leadership will be severely questioned.” He notes, “There has been a strong voice from a very vocal portion of the membership saying that the ORWP needs to be revised with particular focus on the mandatory part of the program. That voice has been largely ignored by OREA.”
Across the province, various boards are amalgamating, hoping to gain a stronger voice by leveraging dynamics of scale. In some cases, the ORWP has been cited as a provoking factor.
OREA denies not accommodating members
OREA maintains that the program needs to be mandatory to keep premium costs low. But the association denies accusations that it’s not accommodating members.
In a statement to REM, Hudak notes, “We have worked with our program administrator, Comprehensive Benefits Solutions (CBS), to develop a process in an effort to ensure no member is left behind and everyone can derive some benefit from this program. If a member has existing coverage and is worried about the ORWP’s potential impact, they can share the details of their provider’s current policy with CBS and their team will review the situation carefully and with complete confidentiality in an effort to propose a suitable accommodation.
To be clear, members will still be required to pay their full OREA dues, but enrollment in the impacted benefit will be removed so they don’t lose their other coverage. In addition, we continue to work closely with member boards to ensure that they are fully prepared for the implementation of the program by providing transitional funding and extending implementation deadlines for data upload.”
Pre-SGM survey
To get more feedback on the ORWP from members, before the SGM a contingent of eight Ontario boards partnered together to conduct a survey, via strategic management consultants Framework Analytics.
The boards are:
- Waterloo Region Association of Realtors
- Simcoe & District Real Estate Board
- Barrie & District Association of Realtors
- Niagara Association of Realtors
- Woodstock Ingersoll Tillsonburg & Area Association of Realtors
- The Lakelands Association of Realtors
- Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington
- London St. Thomas Association of Realtors
In every case, a majority of members indicated that they don’t support the program. Aggregated results from across the eight boards showed 22 per cent in favour of the ORWP and 63 per cent opposed (with the remainder undecided or “other”). Results also suggested that most members would be in favour of the ORWP if it wasn’t mandatory.
TRREB conducted its own member survey in advance of the SGM as well. It indicated that the number of respondents who support the program coming into effect on a mandatory basis and those who don’t is virtually equal (39.6 per cent and 39.5 per cent respectively).
In answer to a similar question, “Should TRREB endorse the program and adopt it as a member benefit?”, more members responded no than yes (35.8 per cent and 31.6 per cent respectively).
Reasons given by those in favour of the ORWP included good value and affordability. The top complaint of those against it was the mandatory aspect — no surprise there — followed by not wanting the coverage due to having existing insurance. The TRREB results also revealed that over 42 per cent of those surveyed were not familiar with the program.
Rather puzzling results. It’s anyone’s guess how the TRREB delegates split their votes at the SGM under the circumstances.
Duce, CEO of WRAR, concludes: “I would suggest that OREA has been working diligently to try to deliver this program by January 1. But, this is also new ground for them and it’s evident they are trying to build the plane while it’s flying. They have not been provided nearly sufficient time to implement a program of this scope. Despite what happened at the vote, there will still be a few chapters that need to be played out.”
Susan Doran is a Toronto-based freelance writer who has been contributing to REM since its very first issue.
Well… i guess class action is only a solution… and it is coming!!!!
TRREB survey shows that 14540 members say no for endorsing ORWP and adopting it as member benefits, 13245 unsure, 12838 say yes. I am not sure why “TRREB is in favor of ORWP” is mentioned in this article.
Thanks for mentioning this – it’s the TRREB voting delegation that was mainly in favour. The article has been updated to clarify.
Your numbers are based on strongly support or strongly oppose. The Toronto Board used these numbers:
strongly support + somewhat support 39.6%
strongly oppose + somehat oppose 39.5%
nuetral 20.3%
in making their determination as to how to use their delegate votes. Before the vote they published the 15 page survey report and advised members that because the vote was evenly split they would use half their vote as yes and half their votes as no.
TRREB survey also shows the biggest reason not to approve ORWP is 74% members selected “Don’t like that it is mandatory”
Did TRREB say they’d use half their votes to vote for the ORWP and half of their votes to vote against? Or did they simply gaslight their members with semantics and say “we won’t use half of our votes to vote in favour” all along planning to use those votes, to abstain. Because what other group has 29 votes they could spare to abstain?
Cannot think of a single legitimate reason why there would be 29 abstainers. Nothing but respect for CEO Bill Duce and all 8 Boards who decided to represent their membership and stand up to a bully.
Per RECO, OREA is a voluntary membership. RECO and TRREB are mandatory for Ontario realtors
Only Reco is mandatory, the local boards like Trreb are not mandatory for an Ontario Real Estate Agent. Belonging to a board is only a necessity to have access to the mls system.
OREA and CREA membership dues are not optional;
to be a Member in good standing with the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board, you have to be a Member in good standing with OREA and CREA.
TRREB handles the issuing and payment processing of this invoice on behalf of OREA and CREA as a service to Members to keep collection
and processing costs at a minimum. All amounts collected are remitted to OREA and CREA. Voluntary….No Way!!!
TRREB is not mandatory, it is not a requirement to belong to any association. RECO is the only one we have no choice. TRREB will be irrelevant once a new MLS type system becomes available. Please folks, we must tip the apple cart over.
to Andrew Sommers: TRREB should correct this. GTA realtors only need RECO and MLS. Without MLS, you are still a licensed realtor in Ontario as long as RECO recognizes you. RECO should take over TRREB as it takes over the other important issues from OREA/CREA.
to Omer Quenneville: Agree. But I remember when I finished the registration from RECO, the RECO staff told me I am OK to go to TRREB now. If RECO recognizes the MLS as a official source for realtors, RECO should not allow this kind of issues to occur. If not, RECO should develop a new system , non profitable and official to Ontario.
A program of this magnitude should have been voted on by all 96,000 Ontario Realtors INDIVIDUALLY, not by a handful of board representatives. It is so obvious that the majority of Realtors in this province are not in favour of a MANDATORY program. I can guarantee you that if an individual vote was done of all members, there would have been a very small percentage that voted in favour of a mandatory program. A very unsettling precedent has been set, and it truly is a very sad day indeed. I cannot help but worry about what other scheme is coming next.
Yes, and the TRREB Survey should have been conducted by an unbiased Third party, Like all the other outside boards did for their members. 29 abstaining? Cowards being bullied in the school yard. Wonder who’s Idea that was?
No, it should not have been voted on, it should have been a non-issue. In a democracy it isn’t majority rules, in a democracy you protect the minority from the majority so everyone has a choice. That is democracy 101, they are playing by Tyranny 101 rules. If we accept this then we are accepting nothing, it is actually being imposed. Whether you want the insurance or not, we should be respecting the needs of all members. Now can someone please tell me who made commission on that insurance sales job.
What a disgrace. Those members that abstained from voting should be removed. This was a simple yes or no discussion to keep and move forward or to end the program. Clearly moving forward with a mandatory plan was not acceptable to the majority of Ontario Realtors. Those 29 votes would have provided a clear picture not muddied the debate further. The names of those who abstained should be made public. Why does OREA continue to harm it’s already tarnished image. Time for Tim Hudak and Tania Artenosi to be removed and the whole mandate of OREA to be reviewed. How can 29 member representatives abstain on such an important vote? Disgraceful! I’m also disillusioned by the number of Realtors that showed as unsure/undecided in the survey. How can you not have an opinion on such an important vote on the direction of the ORWP and the future of organized real estate, when an association can have the power to mess with your good standing and membership in organized real estate.
That was likely a back room deal to make sure it passed.
OREA has claimed in the past that they don’t know who voted for what. It’s all electronic and there is no record of the individual votes. So they say.
TREB conducted their own survey, this is the first problem AND the majority voted no to ORWP but despite this the “delegats” voted yes. So TREB does not work for its members it’s obvious! The members of TREB will know what to do!
All the Boards that voted No to OWRP should leave OREA
OREA has an abusive dominance over its members and I feel they are breaking anticompetitive laws.
Just another “vote” skewed by the abstaining “votes”. Smug OREA has not once even acknowledged that the majority of individual agents in Ontario do NOT want the mandatory ORWP. They have pushed and pushed to get this passed for their own agenda…..yes THEIR own agenda, not ours as realtors. It’s a Benefit ($$) for only OREA to force us all to take it, whether we want it or not. How will they benefit? Those who stay in will see it unfold in the next few years. Those 42% that were shown to be unfamiliar with the ORWP will start whining very soon.
With OREA ‘s membership at approximately 96,000 agents, it’s so-called “Safety” Net has a huge hole in it. And those of us who will escape by either retiring or parking our licenses have been injured. Unfortunately a lot of other injured agents have been caught in the net and have no choice but to stay if they was to stay in the industry and have access to MLS. I’m fortunate to be in a position where I have the option to retire/park, albeit not on my time. The morale inside the net is not a positive one. Many agents will continue to find that escape hole. I will be escaping the Net but will continue to help my colleagues find a way out. Those of us who will be watching and fighting from the sidelines will truly be the ones who “have your backs”
Point 1: It is definitely age discrimination for this plan to be mandatory and to reduce benefits to those over 65 just because of their age. If the plan is mandatory, this should not be the case.
Point 2: OREA needs a “reason d’etre” since they no longer provide education, otherwise their well paid jobs may be questioned.
This is it folks, this is their new reason to be, whether we like it or not, it would seem.
No to Mandatory!
Hum, the vote looks like 55% won the vote to retain the program. However given the numbers, 22% were in favour from that group above, 39.6% and 35.8% of TREB surveys….so how did the results end up at 55%? I consider my math pretty good since I taught it at a college level, and I am a little confused.
Perhaps the list of that special meeting vote should be published. It is NOT confidential and I think to be transparent would nice of OREA. Look forward to seeing the data thanks jf
OREA and TRREB’s actions throughout have been less than transparent and quite egregious. The disrespect shown to the individual registrant is disgusting. For sure there will be legal fallout as there should be. Rolling over the amount for the insurance program into dues is a ploy to ensure that those who need and wish to practice their profession in organized real estate have to accept the mandatory aspect of the plan.
I was also dissappointed that RECO has not intervened if only to say that the introduction of a plan has no bearing on professional competence and should not be linked.
Incredibly sad day for the entire industry.
who got the commission for writing 96,000 insurance policies? and its time for the people to stand up and take back their governments. welcome to the communist regime
#1 the TRREB survey said 40% support, 40% NOT-support and 20-% unusure that means to “follow the membership, TRREB had to allow the 40-pro and 40-con offset each other … and the 20% who were unsure after 5 months prevailed by way of 29 Abstentions. HOW MANY BALLOTS DID TRREB HAVE IN TOTAL?
#2 The First OREA vote in June was supported by 82% with TRREB’s 49% voting yes
Nov 29’s SGM Total Votes were 29 +73 +59 = 132 or 161 ballots depending how you count,
The 73 in favour represented either 55.30% of net ballots cast or 45.34% of all the ballots available to be cast.
Either way a far cry from 82% in June.
Are you folks SURE you have made the right decision:
a) deciding how many to hold as abstentions,
and
b) in the Counting Room at the Harbour Castle at the SGM?
Hi Robert,
The first vote in June was whether or not to move forward with the ORWP.
The vote at the SGM was for amending the ORWP that was passed in June.
What does OREA do for us anyway? This is just a way for them to try and secure the future for OREA. When RECO took away the education part from them we don’t need them anymore.
Get rid of OREA
Thank you OREA and the task force that put so many hours into this.
The task force chaired by someone who had no horse in the race? Stacey Evoy is past president. As such, she gets her coverage for free. She had no vested interest in getting the best coverage for the best price, from the best provider(s). Surely, THAT’S not unethical. (eye roll)
REM received this clarification from OREA: “OREA past presidents do not pay OREA dues and historically have not, but they will pay their ORWP coverage premiums.”
The Toronto Real Estate Board published the result of their survey for Toronto Board members.
The result showed an even split of 39.6% support, 39.5% opposed and 20.3% neutral.
As a result the Toronto Board decided to split their vote at the special meeting. Therefore the Toronto Board was neutral in their vote and it was the support from other Ontario Boards that swung the vote in favour of the ORWP.
How do you place faith in a survey not conducted by a third party? Paul Baron posted an inflammatory video mocking realtors on his Facebook page, then feigned surprise when he was called out about it(despite it being on his page for over a month). It just snuck onto his page. And the professional Kevin Crigger mocked realtors by calling them “tinfoil hat wearing” people at more than one town hall. These are the people who were entrusted to act with integrity when reporting the results of the survey. Riiiiight! If you believe that, do I have a bridge to sell you!
I say great rid of Orea and fire the CEO of Trreb
Maybe what needs to happen is to understand OREA’s future role in organized real estate as well as a review of TRREBs number of votes. If our voting power was more balanced with other boards it would be a ‘our way or the highway’ situation.
Personally I have no issue with putting forth a health plan but the fact that it’s mandatory does get under my skin. Also, with approximately 1/2 the realtors disagreeing with it that has to. Like for something.
I did watch the SGM and found that there was very little listening going on. We should want to and need to do better as a whole.
Correction on Tina Forte’s comment. While past presidents do not pay the $110.00 per year of OREA dues they do pay for ORWP.
As someone that is in support of the ORWP, I would like to say thank you to everyone involved with the task force. Their passion and dedication is inspiring. I think it takes someone very special to be able to volunteer their time and effort while being subjected to personal and negative attacks.
OREA made it clear that you were either in favour of the ORWP (Yes) or you were against the ORWP (No) and as a realtor that belongs to 2 boards I was able to complete 2 very different surveys.
The first survey was very straight forward, yes or no. The no vote prevailed with 75% participation. I wasn’t pleased with the outcome but that is democracy.
The second survey I wasn’t pleased with all. I wasn’t going to complete it because I thought the questions were very skewed and couldn’t be answered fully. I reached out to the analytics company as well as the board with no reply. I did receive a reply from the board CEO and we had a respectful debate through email, so I decide to complete the survey.
This brings me to my conclusion, analytics is data and from that data you get the numbers. You have people in favour, people against, and people that either didn’t participate or had other views, hence you have the the Yes, No, Abstain. That’s democracy/
This is just my opinion.
If the so-called democracy forces you to buy something you don’t need or you don’t have money, you won’t be so thankful. We are not against ORWP. You take whatever you need. We are against MANDATORY ORWP. We don’t need it at all. It is not a decent democracy at all.
We should ask RECO if the MLS# is the official realtor database in Ontario or not. If yes, it should be open to all licensed realtors under RECO. If not, RECO needs to develop a new database system, non profit and official in Ontario. And all realtors should support this system financially. That is the root issue. All other membership under different boards are totally optional.
This ORWP should be made OPTIONAL and not MANDATORY. those who needs it pay for it and others should not.