Collective Bargaining, Labour Law, and the Charter in the Supreme Court of Canada, 1987 to 2017

• Author: Steven Barrett & John Craig
• Pages: 293-378



CollectiveBargaining

LabourLawandtheCharter

intheSupremeCourtofCanada

to

StevenBarreJohnCraig*

This chapterprovides anoverview anda nalysisof the SupremeCourt

ofCan adassh ifting approach tot heg uarantee off reedomof associa

tionundersectiondoftheCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedomsas

itappliestolabourrelations andcollectivebargai ningWefocusont he

Courtstreatmentof the questionof whethersect iondincludescon

stitutional protection forthe right toorgan izet heright to collectively

bargain and the right to strike While the Court sapproach in apply

ingthe justicatorycr iteriaundersec tion oftheCharter tolegislation

itnds unconstitutiona land the resulting remedial questions are also

signicant issues in considering the ambit of associational rights thi s

chapterisdirectedattheCourt sdelineationofthescopeandcontentof

sectionditself

InPartAwetracetheevolutionoftheCourtsthinkingasitrelates

toconstitutionalprotec tionfororganizing bargaininga ndstrikeactiv

ityInour viewanu nderstandingof the doctrinal developmentofthe

Courtsunderstandi ngof sect iondis crit icalto any appreciation of

theCourt spresentviewandhowthatviewmayevolveinfuturecases

PartAbeginswiththeinitialjudicialcreationofavirtualnogozone

establishedby the freedomof association trilogyThisrestrictiveap

proachtotherecognitionofcollectivebargainingrightsundersectiond

 StevenBarreisman agingpart neratGoldblaPartnersLLPJohnCraigisa

partnerint helabourandemploymentdepar tmentatFaskenLLPandanassi stant

professoratWesternLaw

SBJC

wastolast foralmost fteen yearsbutbegan toerode witha moreex

pansive conception of the protection for union organi zing activity in

Dunmore  and for collective bargaining itsel f in Health Services

 . Thisgrowi ngrecog nitionofa broader scopefor sectiondin

labourrelations andcollect ivebargaining wastemporarily interrupted

bya morecautious andreact ionary pausein Frase r whic h sanc 

tioned a separate and somewhat anemic collective bargaini ngr egime

foragricu lturalworkers Howeverfouryears laterin the trilogy

the Court returned to a broad and purposive conception oft he scope

ofsection dprotectionparticularly inM PA Oand inSF L,whichex

tendedsectiondprotectiontotherighttostrikeMostrecentlyhow

eversomeuncertaintyhasbeencreatedastotheprecisecontoursofthe

righttoba rgaincollect ivelybythe Courtsbriefa ndcry pticreasons in

BCTF 

PartB the nt urns to an assessment of what weregard as th ree of

themost importantu nresolvedissues arising fromt heSupremeCour t

of Canadasrevised approach to freedom of associat ioni n the labour

relations and collective bargaini ng eld the role of prelegislative

consultationinsatisf yingthesect iondrequirementforameaningful

processofcollec tivebargaini ngthecurrentstat usofthesubstantial

interferencetest fora violationof section dand the impactof the

Court srevi sedap proac htos ect iondont helaw offorc edas soci ation 

AOV E RVI EWOF T HESC C S E VOLV I N G 

APPROACH TO SECTION (D)

 FreedomofAssociationTrilogy

Whilesectiondappliesto all associational activityithas been most

litigated and its meaning most hotly contested in its application to

labourrelations Int herst yearsafter the enactmentof theCharterin

whatcame tobe knownas the freedomof association trilogythe

Court wasfaced with th rees eparatech allenges tolegi slationi nterfer

ingwith fundamental componentsoft hecollective bargaining system

Int heReference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta)case the

challengedlegislationlimitedt herightto strikefor publicsectorwork

ersI nR etail, Wholesale and Department Store Union v Saskatchewan th e

Saskatchew an Dairy Workerscaselegislationordering striking workers

 SCRAlberta Reference

 SCR

Collective Bargaining, Labour Law, and the CharterintheSupremeCourt

backtoworkwasatissueInthePublic Service Alliance of Canada v Canada

casethelegislationunderchallengeoverrodefreelynegotiatedcollect

iveagreements andimposed wagecontrols Thet hreecasesraisedthe

questionof whethersec tiondprovidedconst itutionalprotect ionfor

collectivebargainingorther ighttostrike

InthetrilogytheSupremeCourtofCanadaadoptedarest rict

ivea ndn arrow approach to the scope and content of the freedom of

associationguaranteeonedepar tingfromthebroada ndpurposiveap

proach the Court had articu lated in relation to other Charterrightsa nd

freedomsI nth etr ilo gyt heCo urt ru ledt hatfr eedo mofass oci ati ond id

notincludearighttocollectivebargainingorstrikeRatherthefreedom

extended protection only to the right to form and join an as sociation

whatcanbedescribedasformativeactivityInadditionsomemem

bers of the Court while reject ing protection for collective bargaining

activityrecog nized doctri nally that section dshould extend to the

right to engage collectively in those associational act ivities that were

otherwiselawfulwhenca rriedoutbyanindividual

While the four members of the Cour ts majority had dierent

reasons for rejecting a n expansive reach for collective bargaining in

thesphereoflabou rrelationsthey putforwardfourbasic rationalesin

supportoftheconclusionthatt heCharterdidnotprotectcollectivebar

gainingortherighttostr ikenamely

a therightstobargaincollectivelyandtostrikeweremodernrights

createdbylegislationandwerenotthe kindoffundamenta lfree

domsthattheCharterprotected

b recognizing a r ightto collec tive bargaining would interfere with

government regulation of labour relations and the court s should

defertogovernmentsinthesensitiveareaofcalibratingt hebalance

ofpowerbetweenunionsandemployers

c sectiondwasnotintendedtoprotecttheobjectsgoalsoractiv

itiesofassociationand

 SCRPSAC

 Seeforexampleinthesec tionbcontexttheSupremeCour tofCanadas

decision in IrwinToyLtdvQuébecAor neyGeneralSCRdealingwith

theexpressiong uaranteeinse ctionboftheCharterTheretheCourttookavery

broadapproachtothecontentofse ctiondrejectingadi stinctionbe tweenbelief

andactionandr ulingthatse ctionbprotectsanyac tivityintend ingtoconvey

meaningiealle xpressiveactivit ywithviolentactivitycon stitutingt heonly

exceptionBycontrastt hemajorityinth eAlberta Reference held that there is no s ec

tiondprotectionforpurelyorin herentlyassoc iationalactiv ityregardlessofits

natureorpurp ose