Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association et al. v. British Columbia, (2007) 242 B.C.A.C. 1 (SCC)

JudgeMcLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish and Abella, JJ.
CourtSupreme Court (Canada)
Case DateJune 08, 2007
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 1 (SCC);2007 SCC 27;AZ-50436503;283 DLR (4th) 40;65 BCLR (4th) 201;DTE 2007T-507;JE 2007-1185;242 BCAC 1;[2007] SCJ No 27 (QL);[2007] 2 SCR 391;[2007] ACS no 27;EYB 2007-120552;157 CRR (2d) 21;[2007] FCJ No 27 (QL);[2007] 7 WWR 191;363 NR 226

Health Services v. B.C. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 1 (SCC);

    400 W.A.C. 1

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2007] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JN.025

Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association, Health Services and Support - Community Subsector Bargaining Association, Nurses' Bargaining Association, Hospital Employees' Union, B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union, British Columbia Nurses' Union, Heather Caroline Birkett, Janine Brooker, Amaljeet Kaur Jhand, Leona Mary Fraser, Pamela Jean Sankey-Kilduff, Sally Lorraine Stevenson, Sharleen G.V. Decillia and Harjeet Dhami (appellants) v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia (respondent) and Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of New Brunswick, Attorney General of Alberta, Confederation of National Trade Unions, Canadian Labour Congress, Michael J. Fraser on his own behalf and on behalf of United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada, and British Columbia Teachers' Federation (intervenors)

(30554; 2007 SCC 27; 2007 CSC 27)

Indexed As: Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association et al. v. British Columbia

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish and Abella, JJ.

June 8, 2007.

Summary:

The province enacted the legislation (Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act, Parts I and II, and Health Sector Labour Adjustment Regulation) which modified health care workers' rights obtained (or obtainable) under collective agreements entered into with health care employers. The legislation provided, inter alia, that health care employers could contract with outside service providers for "non-clinical services", limited lay-off notice to a maximum of 60 days, put in place a more restrictive regime for "bumping" by senior employees, permitted the transfer of workers between different sites, and restricted benefits to which laid off workers were entitled. The plaintiff health care workers and associations challenged the constitutional validity of the legislation as violating freedom of association (Charter, s. 2(d)) and equality rights (s. 15(1)).

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported [2003] B.C.T.C. 1379, dismissed the constitutional challenge. The legislation did not violate freedom of association or equality rights. The defendants appealed, submitting that the legislation violated freedom of association by (1) voiding collective agreements; (2) interfering with workers' ability to join, establish and maintain an association; and (3) interfering with essential aspects of collective bargaining.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in a judgment reported 201 B.C.A.C. 255; 328 W.A.C. 255, dismissed the appeal. The statutory regulation of collective bargaining agreements did not fall within the protective ambit of freedom of association. The legislation did not target associational activity. Workers remained free to join and maintain membership in a union and engage in collective bargaining. The province was constitutionally entitled to establish permissible and prohibited subjects of collective bargaining. The defendants appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada, Deschamps, J., dissenting in part, allowed the appeal in part. Sections 6(2), 6(4) and 9 of the Act violated freedom of association and were not justified as a reasonable limit prescribed by law under s. 1 (failed minimal impairment test). The balance of the sections in Part 2 of the Act did not violate freedom of association and Part 2 did not violate equality rights under s. 15 of the Charter. However, the court suspended the declaration of statute invalidity for 12 months to permit the province to address the repercussions of the decision.

Civil Rights - Topic 987

Discrimination - Employment - On basis of sex - [See Civil Rights - Topic 5668 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 2103

Freedom of association - General - Scope of right - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that freedom of association was not restricted to activities capable of performance by individuals - See paragraphs 28.

Civil Rights - Topic 2144

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Collective bargaining and right to strike - [See all Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 2144.1

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Collective bargaining and employer or employee groups - [See all Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 2155

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Labour legislation - Provincial legislation regulating labour relations in the health care field voided certain provisions in collective agreements and prohibited certain subjects from the collective bargaining process - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "s. 2(d) of the Charter protects the capacity of members of labour unions to engage, in association, in collective bargaining on fundamental workplace issues. This protection does not cover all aspects of 'collective bargaining' ... Nor does it ensure a particular outcome in a labour dispute, or guarantee access to any particular statutory regime. What is protected is simply the right of employees to associate in a process of collective action to achieve workplace goals. If the government substantially interferes with that right, it violates s. 2(d) of the Charter: Dunmore. ... Our conclusion that s. 2(d) of the Charter protects a process of collective bargaining rests on four propositions. First, a review of the s. 2(d) jurisprudence of this court reveals that the reasons evoked in the past for holding that the guarantee of freedom of association does not extend to collective bargaining can no longer stand. Second, an interpretation of s. 2(d) that precludes collective bargaining from its ambit is inconsistent with Canada's historic recognition of the importance of collective bargaining to freedom of association. Third, collective bargaining is an integral component of freedom of association in international law, which may inform the interpretation of Charter guarantees. Finally, interpreting s. 2(d) as including a right to collective bargaining is consistent with, and indeed, promotes, other Charter rights, freedoms and values. ... The right to bargain collectively with an employer enhances the human dignity, liberty and autonomy of workers by giving them the opportunity to influence the establishment of workplace rules and thereby gain some control over a major aspect of their lives, namely their work" - See paragraphs 19 to 20, 82.

Civil Rights - Topic 2155

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Labour legislation - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that s. 2(d) "does not guarantee the particular objectives sought through this associational activity. However, it guarantees the process through which those goals are pursued. It means that employees have the right to unite, to present demands to health sector employers collectively and to engage in discussions in an attempt to achieve workplace-related goals. Section 2(d) imposes corresponding duties on government employers to agree to meet and discuss with them. ... Section 2(d) does not protect all aspects of the associational activity of collective bargaining. It protects only against 'substantial interference' with associational activity. ... intent to interfere with the associational right of collective bargaining is not essential to establish breach of s. 2(d) of the Charter. It is enough if the effect of the state law or action is to substantially interfere with the activity of collective bargaining, thereby discouraging the collective pursuit of common goals. It follows that the state must not substantially interfere with the ability of a union to exert meaningful influence over working conditions through a process of collective bargaining conducted in accordance with the duty to bargain in good faith. ... The right to collective bargaining thus conceived is a limited right. First, as the right is to a process, it does not guarantee a certain substantive or economic outcome. Moreover, the right is to a general process of collective bargaining, not to a particular model of labour relations, nor to a specific bargaining method." - See paragraphs 89 to 91.

Civil Rights - Topic 2155

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Labour legislation - Provincial legislation regulating labour relations in the health care field voided certain provisions in collective agreements and prohibited certain subjects from the collective bargaining process - At issue was whether the legislation "substantially interfered" with the freedom of association, which protected the right to bargain collectively - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "whether a government measure affecting the protected process of collective bargaining amounts to substantial interference involves two inquiries. The first inquiry is into the importance of the matter affected to the process of collective bargaining, and more specifically, to the capacity of the union members to come together and pursue collective goals in concert. The second inquiry is into the manner in which the measure impacts on the collective right to good faith negotiation and consultation. ... If the matters affected do not substantially impact on the process of collective bargaining, the measure does not violate s. 2(d) and, indeed, the employer may be under no duty to discuss and consult. There will be no need to consider process issues. If, on the other hand, the changes substantially touch on collective bargaining, they will still not violate s. 2(d) if they preserve a process of consultation and good faith negotiation." - The court discussed the scope of the duty to bargain in good faith - See paragraphs 93 to 109.

Civil Rights - Topic 2155

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Labour legislation - The province enacted the legislation (Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act, Parts I and II, and Health Sector Labour Adjustment Regulation) which modified health care workers' rights obtained (or obtainable) under collective agreements entered into with health care employers - The legislation provided, inter alia, that health care employers could contract with outside service providers for "non-clinical services", limited lay-off notice to a maximum of 60 days, put in place a more restrictive regime for "bumping" by senior employees, permitted the transfer of workers between different sites, and restricted benefits to which laid off workers were entitled - The Supreme Court of Canada held that ss. 6(2), 6(4) and 9 of the Act, which dealt with contracting out, the status of employees under a contracting-out arrangement and bumping rights, violated freedom of association and were not justified as a reasonable limit prescribed by law under s. 1 (failed minimal impairment test) - Those sections effectively precluded meaningful collective bargaining, substantially interfering with the s. 2(d) Charter right to bargain collectively - There was no consultation at all, let alone bargaining in good faith - The balance of the sections in Part 2 of the Act, which dealt with transfer and reassignment of employees and job security programs, did not violate freedom of association as neither the purpose nor effect of those provisions interfered with past or present collective bargaining - The court stayed the declaration of statute invalidity for 12 months to permit the government to address the repercussions of the decision - See paragraphs 110 to 161, 168.

Civil Rights - Topic 5668

Equality and protection of the law - Particular cases - Labour legislation - Provincial legislation regulating labour relations in the health care sector voided certain rights obtained by workers during collective bargaining and prohibited collective bargaining respecting certain subjects - The legislation provided, inter alia, that health care employers could contract out for "non-clinical services", limited lay-off notice to a maximum of 60 days, put in place a more restrictive regime for "bumping" by senior employees, permitted the transfer of workers between different sites, and restricted benefits to which laid off workers were entitled - Workers submitted that the legislation violated the s. 15(1) Charter rights of the predominantly female-worker health sector, discriminating on the basis of sex - They submitted that workers in a female-dominated industry constituted an "analogous ground" of discrimination - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed that the legislation did not violate s. 15(1), stating that "the distinctions made by the Act relate essentially to segregating different sectors of employment, in accordance with the long-standing practice in labour regulation of creating legislation specific to particular segments of the labour force, and do not amount to discrimination under s. 15 of the Charter. The differential and adverse effects of the legislation on some groups of workers relate essentially to the type of work they do, and not to the persons they are. ... the differential treatment based on personal characteristics to get a discrimination analysis off the ground is absent here." - See paragraphs 162 to 165.

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - [See fourth Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8380.2

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Declaration of statute invalidity - [See fourth Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8470

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - International law - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "the Charter should be presumed to provide at least as great a level of protection as is found in the international human rights documents that Canada has ratified" - See paragraph 70.

Labour Law - Topic 9384

Public service labour relations - Collective bargaining - Whether parties negotiated in good faith - [See third Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Cases Noticed:

Law v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 497; 236 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 16].

Dunmore et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) et al., [2001] 3 S.C.R. 1016; 279 N.R. 201; 154 O.A.C. 201; 2001 SCC 94, refd to. [para. 17].

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1, overruled [para. 23].

Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.) - see Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration.

Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Canada, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 424; 75 N.R. 161; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 249, overruled [para. 23].

Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union, Locals 544, 496, 635 and 955 et al. v. Saskatchewan et al., [1987] 1 S.C.R. 460; 74 N.R. 321; 56 Sask.R. 277; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 277; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 673, overruled [para. 23].

Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada v. Northwest Territories (Commissioner) et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 367; 112 N.R. 269, overruled [para. 23].

Canadian Egg Marketing Agency v. Pineview Poultry Products Ltd. et al., [1998] 3 S.C.R. 157; 231 N.R. 201; 223 A.R. 201; 183 W.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 32].

Canadian Egg Marketing Agency v. Richardson - see Canadian Egg Marketing Agency v. Pineview Poultry Products Ltd. et al.

R. v. Advance Cutting and Coring Ltd. et al., [2001] 3 S.C.R. 209; 276 N.R. 1; 205 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 2001 SCC 70, refd to. [para. 33].

Delisle v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 989; 244 N.R. 33, refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295; 58 N.R. 81; 60 A.R. 161, refd to. [para. 39].

Perrault v. Gauthier (1898), 28 S.C.R. 241, refd to. [para. 50].

Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 3; 281 N.R. 1; 2002 SCC 1, refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. Dubois, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 350; 62 N.R. 50; 66 A.R. 202, refd to. [para. 80].

Walsh v. Bona, [2002] 4 S.C.R. 325; 297 N.R. 203; 210 N.S.R.(2d) 273; 659 A.P.R. 273; 2002 SCC 83, refd to. [para. 80].

Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Walsh - see Walsh v. Bona.

R. v. Zundel (No. 2), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 731; 140 N.R. 1; 56 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 81].

Corbière et al. v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) et al., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 203; 239 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 81].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to. [para. 81].

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701; 219 N.R. 161; 123 Man.R.(2d) 1; 159 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 82].

Pepsi-Cola Canada Beverages (West) Ltd. v. Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 558 et al., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 156; 280 N.R. 333; 217 Sask.R. 22; 265 W.A.C. 22; 2002 SCC 8, refd to. [para. 83].

Lavigne v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al., [1991] 2 S.C.R. 211; 126 N.R. 161; 48 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 85].

Royal Oak Mines Inc. v. Canada Labour Relations Board et al., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 369; 193 N.R. 81, refd to. [para. 101].

Labour Relations Board (N.S.) v. Canadian Union of Public Employees et al., [1983] 2 S.C.R. 311; 49 N.R. 107; 60 N.S.R.(2d) 369; 128 A.P.R. 369, refd to. [para. 103].

United Electrical Workers, Local 512 and Tung-Sol of Canada Ltd., Re (1964), 15 L.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 130].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Dagenais et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835; 175 N.R. 1; 76 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 138].

Thomson Newspapers Co. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 877; 226 N.R. 1; 109 O.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 139].

Harper v. Canada (Attorney General), [2004] 1 S.C.R. 827; 320 N.R. 49; 348 A.R. 201; 321 W.A.C. 201; 2004 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 139].

Chaoulli v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 791; 335 N.R. 25; 2005 SCC 35, refd to. [para. 144].

Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. Newfoundland Association of Public Employees, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 381; 326 N.R. 25; 242 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 113; 719 A.P.R. 113; 2004 SCC 66, refd to. [para. 145].

Workers' Compensation Board (N.S.) v. Martin et al., [2003] 2 S.C.R. 504; 310 N.R. 22; 217 N.S.R.(2d) 301; 683 A.P.R. 301; 2003 SCC 54, refd to. [para. 145].

Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium et al. v. Canada (Minister of Justice) et al., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 1120; 263 N.R. 203; 145 B.C.A.C. 1; 237 W.A.C. 1; 2000 SCC 69, refd to. [para. 148].

D.W.T. v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al., [2003] 1 S.C.R. 835; 304 N.R. 201; 183 B.C.A.C. 1; 301 W.A.C. 1; 2003 SCC 34, refd to. [para. 148].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199; 187 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 150].

Haig et al. v. Canada; Haig et al. v. Kingsley, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 995; 156 N.R. 81, refd to. [para. 176].

Native Women's Association of Canada et al. v. Canada et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 627; 173 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 176].

R. v. Bryan (P.C.) et al. (2007), 359 N.R. 1; 237 B.C.A.C. 33; 392 WA.C. 33; 2007 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 192].

R. v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697; 117 N.R. 1; 114 A.R. 81, refd to. [para. 225].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713; 71 N.R. 161; 19 O.A.C. 239; 30 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 55 C.R.(3d) 193; 35 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 227].

Edwards Books and Art Ltd. v. R. - see R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al.

R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd. - see R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al.

Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys et al., [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256; 345 N.R. 201; 2006 SCC 6, refd to. [para. 233].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1, sect. 2(d) [para. 172]; sect. 15(1) [para. 163].

Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 2, sect. 4, sect. 5, sect. 6, sect. 7, sect. 8, sect. 9, sect. 10 [para. 172].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Adams, George W., Canadian Labour Law (2nd Ed. 1993) (2006 Looseleaf Update, Release 26), p. 1-2, § 1.30 [para. 47]; 1-4, § 1.40 [para. 49]; 1-5, § 1.70 [para. 50]; 1-5, para. 170 [para. 53]; 1-6 [para. 55]; 1-10 [para. 56]; 2-98 [para. 60]; 10-91, 10-92 [para. 99]; 10-96, 10-97 [para. 106]; 10-101, 10-106 [para. 100]; 10-107 [para. 101].

Baggaley, Carman D., A Century of Labour Regulation in Canada, Working Paper No. 19 (1981), p. 57 [para. 54].

Beaulieu, M.-L., Les Conflits de Droit dans les Rapports Collectifs du Travail (1955), pp. 29, 30 [para. 45]; 73 [para. 50].

Bernatchez, Stéphane, La procéduralisation contextuelle et systémique de contrôle de constitutionnalité à la lumière de l'affaire Sauvé (2006), 20 N.J.C.L. 73, pp. 87 to 90 [para. 196].

British Columbia, Hansard, Debates of the Legislative Assembly, vol. 2, No. 28, 2nd Sess., 37th Parliament (January 25, 2002), p. 865 [para. 5].

British Columbia, Hansard, Debates of the Legislative Assembly, vol. 2, No. 29, 2nd Sess., 37th Parliament (January 26, 2002), p. 909 [para. 211].

British Columbia, Health Employers Association of British Columbia, Briefing Document - Agreement Efficiencies (2001), pp. 1 [para. 216]; 4 [para. 241]; 6 [para. 244].

Brown, Donald J.M., and Beatty, David M., Canadian Labour Arbitration (4th Ed. 2006) (Looseleaf), vol. 2, p. 6-1, para. 6:0000 [para. 130].

Calvert, John R., Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector in Canada: Teething Troubles or Genuine Crisis? (1987), 2 Brit. J. Can. Stud. 1, generally [para. 61].

Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates, 5th Sess., 1st Parliament (May 7, 1872), p. 392 [para. 52].

Canada, Special Joint Committee of the Senate and of the House of Commons on the Constitution of Canada, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, Issue No. 43, 1st Sess., 32nd Parliament (January 22, 1981), pp. 69, 70 [para. 67].

Canada, Task Force on Labour Relations, Canadian Industrial Relations: The Report of Task Force on Labour Relations (1968) (Woods Report), pp. 13 [para. 42]; 96 [para. 85]; 138 [para. 64].

Carrothers, A.W.R., Palmer, E.E., and Rayner, W.B., Collective Bargaining Law in Canada (2nd Ed. 1986), pp. 16 [para. 49]; 18 [para. 50]; 19 [para. 53]; 30 [para. 53]; 32 [para. 55]; 37 [para. 55]; 47, 48, 50 [para. 58]; 453 [para. 101].

Carter, Donald D., England, Geoffrey, Etherington, Brian, Trudeau, Gilles, Labour Law in Canada (5th Ed. 2002), pp. 48 [para. 46]; 300 [para. 104]; 301 [para. 100]; 302 [paras. 102, 106].

Chartrand, Mark, The First Canadian Trade Union Legislation: An Historical Perspective (1984), 16 Ott. L. Rev. 267, generally [para. 52].

Cornish, W.R., and Clark, G. de N., Law and Society in England 1750-1950 (1989), p. 297 [para. 47].

Coutu, Michel, Les libertés syndicales dans le secteur public (1989), pp. 26 to 29 [para. 77].

Deakin, Simon, and Morris, Gillian S., Labour Law (4th Ed. 2005), pp. 7 [para. 48]; 8, 9, 10 [para. 49].

Forde, M., The European Convention on Human Rights and Labor Law (1983), 31 Am. J. Comp. L. 301, p. 302 [para. 76].

Fudge, Judy, and Tucker, Eric, Labour Before the Law: The Regulation of Workers' Collective Action in Canada, 1900-1948 (2001), p. 2 [para. 53].

Fudge, Judy, and Glasbeek, Harry, The Legacy of PC 1003 (1995), 3 C.L.E.L.J. 357, pp. 358 [para. 58]; 359 [para. 59]; 370 [para. 60]; 384, 385 [para. 61].

Gagnon, Robert P., LeBel, Louis, et Verge, Pierre, Droit du travail, 2é éd., 1991, pp. 19, 20 [para. 56]; 25 [para. 55]; 26, 27 [para. 43]; 499, 500 [para. 103]; 620, 621 [para. 50].

Gall, Peter A., Freedom of Association and Trade Unions: A Double-Edged Constitutional Sword in Weiler, Joseph M., and Elliot, Robin M., Litigating the Values of a Nation: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1986), p. 248 [para. 91].

Gernigon, Bernard, Odero, Alberto, and Guido, Horacio, ILO principles concerning collective bargaining (2000), 139 Intern'l Lab. Rel. 33, pp. 51, 52 [para. 77].

Giles, Anthony, Smith, Anthony E., and Wetzel, Kurt, Proceedings of the XXXIst Conference - Canadian Industrial Relations Association (1995), p. 60 [para. 54].

Glenday, Daniel, and Schrenk, Christopher, Trade Unions and the State: An Interpretative Essay on the Historical Development of Class and State Relations in Canada, 1889-1947 (1978), 2 Alternate Routes 114, pp. 121 [para. 84]; 128 [para. 54].

Hansard - see Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates.

Hansard (B.C.) - see British Columbia, Hansard, Debates of the Legislative Assembly.

Hogg, Peter W., Constitutional Law of Canada (Student Ed. 2002), p. 801 [para. 227].

International Labour Office, Committee on Freedom of Association, Report No. 330, Cases Nos. 2166, 2173, 2180 and 2196 Complaints against the Government of Canada concerning the Province of British Columbia, I.L.O. Official Bulletin (2003), vol. LXXXVI, Series B., No. 1, paras. 267 [para. 203]; 269 [para. 246].

Kealey, Greg, Canada investigates industrialism: The Royal Commission on the Relations of Labor and Capital, 1889 (1973), generally [para. 84].

Klare, Karl E., Judicial Deradicalization of the Wagner Act and the Origins of Modern Legal Consciousness, 1937-1941 (1978), 62 Minn. L. Rev. 265, pp. 281 to 284 [para. 57].

Laskin, Bora, Collective Bargaining in Canada: In Peace and in War (1941), 2:3 Food for Thought 8, p. 8 [para. 29].

Lipton, Charles, The Trade Union Movement of Canada, 1827-1959 (4th Ed. 1978), pp. 1 to 8 [para. 46].

Morin, Fernand, Brière, Jean-Yves, et Roux, Dominic, Le droit de l'emploi au Québec, 3é éd., 2006, pp. 1026, 1027 [para. 99].

Palmer, Bryan D., Working-Class Experience: Rethinking the History of Canadian Labour, 1800-1991 (2nd Ed. 1992), pp. 66 [para. 50]; 111 [para. 52].

Riddall, J.G., The Law of Industrial Relations (1981), p. 24 [para. 47].

Rose, Joseph B., Public Sector Bargaining: From Retrenchment to Consolidation (2004), 59 I.R. 271, p. 275 [para. 62].

Rouillard, Jacques, Histoire du syndicalisme au Québec: Des origines à nos jours (1989), p. 11 [para. 46].

Thompson, Mark, Wagnerism in Canada: Compared to What? in Giles, Anthony, Smith, Anthony E., and Wetzel, Kurt, Proceedings of the XXXIst Conference - Canadian Industrial Relations Association (1995), p. 60 [para. 54].

Tucker, Eric, That Indefinite Area of Toleration: Criminal Conspiracy and Trade Unions in Ontario, 1837-77 (1991), 27 Labour 15, generally [para. 50].

Tucker, Eric, The Faces of Coercion: The Legal Regulation of Labor Conflict in Ontario, 1880-1889 (1994), 12 L. & Hist. Rev. 277, generally [para. 44].

United Nations, Human Rights Committee, Consideration of Reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant - Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee - Canada, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C79/Add.105 (April 7, 1999), generally [para. 74].

Villaggi, Jean-Pierre, La convention collective et l'obligation de négocier de bonne foi: les leçons du travail (1996), 26 R.D.U.S. 355, pp. 360, 361 [para. 106].

Webber, Jeremy, Compelling Compromise: Canada chooses Conciliation over Arbitration 1900-1907 (1991), 28 Labour 15, generally [para. 55].

Wedderburn, K., The Worker and the Law (3rd Ed. 1986), pp. 514, 515 [para. 47].

Weiler, Joseph M., and Elliot, Robin M., Litigating the Values of a Nation: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1986), p. 248 [para. 91].

Weiler, Paul C., Reconcilable Differences: New Directions in Canadian Labour Law (1980), pp. 31, 32 [para. 85]; 33 [para. 82].

Woods Report - see Canada, Task Force on Labour Relations, Canadian Industrial Relations: The Report of Task Force on Labour Relations.

Counsel:

Joseph J. Arvay, Q.C., and Catherine J. Boies Parker, for the appellants;

Peter A. Gall, Q.C., Nitya Iyer and Neena Sharma, for the respondent;

Robin K. Basu and Shannon Chace-Hall, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Ontario;

Written submissions only by Gaétan Migneault, for the intervenor, Attorney General of New Brunswick;

Roderick S. Wiltshire, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Alberta;

Mario Évangéliste, for the intervenor, Confederation of National Trade Unions;

Steven M. Barrett and Ethan Poskanzer, for the intervenor, Canadian Labour Congress;

Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo and Fay C. Faraday, for the intervenor, Michael J. Fraser on his own behalf and on behalf of United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada;

John Baigent and David Yorke, for the intervenor, British Columbia Teachers' Federation.

Solicitors of Record:

Arvay Finlay, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the appellants;

Heenan Blaikie, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the respondent;

Attorney General of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Ontario;

Attorney General of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, for the intervenor, Attorney General of New Brunswick;

Department of Justice, Edmonton, Alberta, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Alberta;

Pepin et Roy Avocats, Montreal, Quebec, forthe intervenor, Confederation of National Trade Unions;

Sack Goldblatt Mitchell, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, Canadian Labour Congress;

Cavalluzzo Hayes Shilton McIntyre & Cornish, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, Michael J. Fraser on his own behalf and on behalf of United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada;

Noonan Hewson Law Office, Vernon, British Columbia, for the intervenor, British Columbia Teachers' Federation.

This appeal was heard on February 8, 2007, before McLachlin, C.J.C., Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish and Abella, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

On June 8, 2007, the judgment of the Court was delivered in both officials languages and the following opinions were filed:

McLachlin,  C.J.C.,   and  LeBel,  J.  (Bastarache, Binnie, Fish and Abella, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 168;

Deschamps, J., dissenting in part - see paragraphs 169 to 252.

To continue reading

Request your trial
303 practice notes
  • Association des Pilotes d’Air Canada c. Kelly,
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • February 3, 2011
    ..., 348 A.R. 201 , 239 D.L.R. (4th) 193 ; Health Services and Support – Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391 , 283 D.L.R. (4th) 40, [2007] 7 W.W.R. 191; R. v. Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd., 2001 SCC 70 , [2001] 3 S.C.R. 20......
  • Fraser et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2011] N.R. TBEd. AP.052
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • December 17, 2009
    ...[paras. 1, 152, 297, 323]. Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association et al. v. British Columbia, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391; 363 N.R. 226 ; 242 B.C.A.C. 1 ; 400 W.A.C. 1 ; 2007 SCC 27 , appld. [paras. 7, 121, 297, Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S......
  • Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie‑Britannique v. British Columbia, 2020 SCC 13
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • June 12, 2020
    ...N.A.P.E., 2004 SCC 66 , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 381 ; Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391 . By Brown and Rowe JJ. (dissenting in part) Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie‑Britannique v. British Columbia......
  • Canada (Gouverneur général en conseil) c. Première nation crie Mikisew,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • December 7, 2016
    ...Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; Health Services and Support – Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391; Ward v. Samson Cree Nation No. 444, 1999 CanLII 8641 , 247 N.R. 254 (F.C.A.); Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Developme......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
173 cases
  • Association des Pilotes d’Air Canada c. Kelly,
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • February 3, 2011
    ..., 348 A.R. 201 , 239 D.L.R. (4th) 193 ; Health Services and Support – Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391 , 283 D.L.R. (4th) 40, [2007] 7 W.W.R. 191; R. v. Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd., 2001 SCC 70 , [2001] 3 S.C.R. 20......
  • Fraser et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2011] N.R. TBEd. AP.052
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • December 17, 2009
    ...[paras. 1, 152, 297, 323]. Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association et al. v. British Columbia, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391; 363 N.R. 226 ; 242 B.C.A.C. 1 ; 400 W.A.C. 1 ; 2007 SCC 27 , appld. [paras. 7, 121, 297, Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S......
  • Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie‑Britannique v. British Columbia, 2020 SCC 13
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • June 12, 2020
    ...N.A.P.E., 2004 SCC 66 , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 381 ; Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391 . By Brown and Rowe JJ. (dissenting in part) Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie‑Britannique v. British Columbia......
  • Canada (Gouverneur général en conseil) c. Première nation crie Mikisew,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • December 7, 2016
    ...Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; Health Services and Support – Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391; Ward v. Samson Cree Nation No. 444, 1999 CanLII 8641 , 247 N.R. 254 (F.C.A.); Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Developme......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 firm's commentaries
  • 'Stare Decisis' And Constitutional Supremacy: Will Our Charter Past Become An Obstacle To Our Charter Future?
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 21, 2013
    ... 32 Man. L.J. 135 , at 137 [hereinafter "Precedent Unbound?"]. 14 "Precedent Unbound?", id., at 146. 15 [2007] S.C.J. No. 27 , [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391 (S.C.C.) [hereinafter "Health 16 [2011] S.C.J. No. 20 , [2011] 2 S.C.R. 3 (S.C.C.) [hereinafter "Fraser"]. 17 That trilogy of cases included......
  • Top 5 Civil Appeals From The Court Of Appeal (September 2012)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 3, 2012
    ...Court of Canada clarified its earlier decision in Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391. That decision held that s. 2(d) does not require a particular model of bargaining or outcome but, rather, only guarant......
  • Employees Have The Right To Associate But Not Necessarily To Reap An Economic Benefit
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • June 23, 2014
    ...locale 675, 2014 QCCA 1068. 2 SC 2009, c 2. 3 Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v British Columbia, 2007 SCC 27 and Ontario (Attorney General) v Fraser, 2011 SCC 4 Op. cit., note 3. Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP Norton Rose Fulbright is a global legal pr......
  • Wal-Mart Victory At The Supreme Court
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • December 2, 2009
    ...bargaining, as described in its decision in Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia (2007 SCC 27) justify a departure from this However, despite its findings with respect to ss. 15 to 17 of the Labour Code, the Supreme Court made it clear that......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
118 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Public International Law. Second Edition
    • June 16, 2008
    ...Ct. 2891 (1993) .................... 345 Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia (2007), 283 D.L.R. (4th) 40, 363 N.R. 226, 2007 SCC 27 ......................................................................................... 260– 6 2 Heathf‌i......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Youth Criminal Justice Law. Third Edition
    • June 18, 2012
    ...6, 101, 419 Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 391, 283 D.L.R. (4th) 40, 2007 SCC 27 ................................................................................... 96 Ibrahim v. The King, [1914] A.C. 599 (P.C.) ...........
  • Endnotes
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books False Security. The Radicalization of Canadian Anti-Terrorism
    • June 21, 2015
    ...R v Hape , 2007 SCC 26 at para 56. See also Health Services and Support — Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association v British Columbia , 2007 SCC 27 at para 79. 94 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment , 10 December 1984, 1465 UNTS 85, ar......
  • A Real and Substantial Look at Jurisdiction in the Civil and Class Action Settings
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Canadian Class Action Review No. 8-2, May 2013
    • May 1, 2013
    ...2, argue that the “material contribution to risk” test enunciated in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Resurfice Corp v Hanke, 2007 SCC 27 [Resurfice] provides a proper standard for determining causation for claims involving chemical exposure. Although Resurfice has not been applied......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT