Ajax (Town) v. National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Local 222 et al., (1998) 113 O.A.C. 188 (CA)

• Judge: Austin, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: May 22, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1998), 113 O.A.C. 188 (CA)

Ajax v. NAAAIWU (1998), 113 O.A.C. 188 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] O.A.C. TBEd. OC.022

In The Matter Of the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J.1;

And In The Matter Of the Labour Relations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.2, as amended;

And In The Matter Of the decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board dated October 27, 1994.

The Corporation of the Town of Ajax (applicant/respondent) v. National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 222, Charterways Transportation Limited (respondent/appellant) and Ontario Labour Relations Board (respondent/respondent)

(C22706)

Indexed As: Ajax (Town) v. National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Local 222 et al.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Austin, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A.

September 30, 1998.

Summary:

A town contracted with Charterways to provide it with the drivers, mechanics and cleaners needed to operate its transit system. The Charterways employees were unionized. The town took back the operation of its transit system and cancelled its contract with Charterways. It hired its own drivers, mech­anics and cleaners, the vast majority of whom came from the group of Charterways employees that had previously operated the transit system. On an application by the union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that a sale of a part of a business within the meaning of s. 64 of the Labour Relations Act had occurred. The town applied for judicial review.

The Ontario Divisional Court, in a decision reported at 84 O.A.C. 281, allowed the application. The union appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the application for judicial review. The Board's decision was not patently unreasonable.

Labour Law - Topic 576

Labour relations boards and judicial review - Judicial review - General - Standard of review - The Ontario Court of Appeal reiterated that the standard of review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision was patent unreasonableness - The court stated that "[i]f the approach taken by the Board is a reasonable one, that is if it is rationally supportable, and if the decision gives to the section of the Act a meaning which the words can reasonably bear, that decision will not be disturbed on review." - See paragraph 13.

Labour Law - Topic 4908

Unions - Successor rights and obligations - Sale, lease, transfer or disposition of busi­ness - A town contracted with Charterways to provide it with the drivers, mechanics and cleaners needed to operate its transit system - The Charterways employees were unionized - The town took back the opera­tion of its transit sys­tem - It hired its own drivers, mechanics and clean­ers, the vast majority of whom were ex-Charterways employees who had previous­ly operated the transit system - The On­tario Labour Relations Board declared that a sale of a part of a business within the meaning of s. 64 of the Labour Relations Act had oc­curred - On judicial review, the Ontario Divisional Court held that the Board's decision was patently unreasonable - The union appealed - The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Cases Noticed:

Planet Development Corp. and Lester (W.W.) (1978) Ltd. v. United Associ­ation of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry in the United States and Canada, Local 740, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 644; 123 N.R. 241; 88 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 15; 274 A.P.R. 15, refd to. [para. 5, footnote 1].

Lester (W.W.) (1978) Ltd. - see Planet Development Corp.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Public Ser­vice Alliance of Canada, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 941; 150 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 12].

Syndicat national des employés de la com­mission scolaire régionale de l'Outaouais (CSN) v. Union des employés de service, local 298 (FTQ), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 1048; 95 N.R. 161; 24 Q.A.C. 244, dist. [para. 29].

U.E.S. - see Union des employées de service.

Bibeault - see Syndicat national des employés de la commission scolaire régionale de l'Outaouais (CSN) v. Union des employés de service, local 298.

Statutes Noticed:

Ontario Labour Relations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L-2, sect. 64(1) [para. 6].

Counsel:

Barrie Chercover, for the appellant;

Richard J. Charney and Damhnait Monaghan, for the respondent, the Cor­poration of the Town of Ajax;

Ronald N. Lebi, for the respondent, Ontario Labour Relations Board.

This appeal was heard on May 22, 1998, by Austin, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. Goudge, J.A., released the following decision for the court on September 30, 1998.