Canada Safeway Ltd. v. Retail Store Employees Union, Local 832, (1980) 2 Man.R.(2d) 100 (CA)

• Judge: Freedman, C.J.M., Monnin and Huband, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: January 21, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1980), 2 Man.R.(2d) 100 (CA);1979 CanLII 2610 (MB QB);100 DLR (3d) 479;2 Man R (2d) 100

Can. Safeway Ltd. v. RSEU (1980), 2 Man.R.(2d) 100 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Retail Store Employees' Union, Local 832 and Last v. Canada Safeway Limited

Indexed As: Canada Safeway Ltd. v. Retail Store Employees Union, Local 832

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Freedman, C.J.M., Monnin and Huband, JJ.A.

January 21, 1980.

Summary:

This case arose out of an application for an injunction by a union and one of its members to restrain the dismissal of the member from his employment until his grievances were disposed of on arbitration. The union member, an employee of a store, was suspended from his employment for wearing a beard and was told he would be fired if his beard was not shaved on his return. The employee and the union filed grievances respecting the disciplinary measures and applied for an injunction to restrain the firing until arbitration of the grievances.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench in a judgment reported 1 Man.R.(2d) 131 allowed the application. The employer appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and refused to set aside the injunction - see paragraphs 1 to 17.

Monnin, J.A., dissenting, would have set aside the injunction on the ground that the employee had failed to show that damages would not be an adequate remedy for his dismissal - see paragraphs 18 to 30.

Injunctions - Topic 1778

Interlocutory or interim injunctions - Preservation of status quo - Pending outcome of labour arbitration - A store employee was warned and reprimanded a number of times for refusing to shave his beard - Finally, he was suspended for three days and was told that he would be fired if his beard was not shaved on his return - The employee and his union filed grievances respecting the disciplinary measures and brought a motion for an injunction to restrain his firing until his grievances were disposed of on arbitration - A fellow employee had already won a grievance arbitration on the same issue - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench granted the injunction and held that it was just and equitable to restrain the employee's firing pending the determination of the grievance arbitration - The Court of Queen's Bench found that the employee could not be adequately compensated in damages, if he was fired and later reinstated - The Court of Queen's Bench also considered that in the collective agreement between the union and the employer the parties agreed to be bound by arbitration awards and the employer was refusing to be bound by the result of the other employee's arbitration - The Court of Queen's Bench also considered that the right to wear a beard had already been decided by the other arbitrator - The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the employer's appeal.

Cases Noticed:

Re Tilco Plastics Ltd. v. Skurjat, [1966] 2 O.R. 547, refd to. [para. 9].

Western Publishers Limited v. Moose Jaw Typographical Union No. 627, 74 C.L.L.C. 14,255, refd to. [para. 9].

Re Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America and Polax Tailoring Ltd., 24 L.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 9].

Counsel:

R.J. Hansell, for the defendant/appellant;

R.R. Edge and A.R. McGregor, for the plaintiffs/respondent.

This case was heard on October 21, 1979, at Winnipeg, Manitoba, before FREEDMAN, C.J.M., MONNIN and HUBAND, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

On January 21, 1980, the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

FREEDMAN, C.J.M., - see paragraphs 1 to 17;

MONNIN, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 18 to 30.

HUBAND, J.A., concurred with FREEDMAN, C.J.M.