Lavigne v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al.

• Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction (Canada)
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Judge: Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ.
• Citation: (1991), 126 N.R. 161 (SCC),48 OAC 241,[1991] ACS no 52,[1991] SCJ No 52 (QL),4 CRR (2d) 193,1991 CanLII 68 (SCC),[1991] 2 SCR 211,126 NR 161,3 OR (3d) 511,81 DLR (4th) 545,4 CCR (2d) 193
• Date: 27 June 1991

Lavigne v. OPSEU (1991), 126 N.R. 161 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

Francis Edmund Mervyn Lavigne (appellant) v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union and Ontario Council of Regents for Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (respondents) and Attorney General of Canada, Attorney General for Ontario, Attorney General of Quebec, Canadian Labour Congress, Ontario Federation of Labour, National Union of Provincial Government Employees, Confederation of National Trade Unions and Canadian Civil Liberties Association (intervenors)

(21378)

Indexed As: Lavigne v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al.

Supreme Court of Canada

Wilson, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé,

Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ.

June 27, 1991.

Summary:

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union represented teachers at community colleges. A collective agreement between the union and the Council of Regents for the community colleges provided for compulsory check-off of amounts equal to regular monthly union dues from the salaries of all employees in the bargaining unit, regardless of whether the employees were members of the union. These monies were used by the union for purposes authorized by the union's constitution.

In October 1984 the union went on lawful strike. By s. 59(2) of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, which provided specifically for collective bargaining by employees of community colleges, all employees in the bargaining unit concerned were deemed to be on strike, regardless of whether the employee was a union member.

Lavigne was a community college teacher and a member of the bargaining unit but a non-member of the union. Lavigne was opposed to the strike. Lavigne returned to work and continued teaching during the strike, although he received no salary or benefits during the strike and was precluded from receiving strike pay because he was not a union member. Lavigne brought an action against the union and the Council of Regents for various declaratory relief. Lavigne alleged that his Charter rights had been violated. Specifically, Lavigne objected to s. 59(2) of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, to the compulsory payment of union dues by non-union members such as himself and to the fact that union dues were being used for purposes not related to collective bargaining. Lavigne objected that the dues which he was required to pay to the union were being used to support political and social causes with which he did not agree.

The Ontario High Court delivered its decision in two stages. The court, in a deci­sion reported in 55 O.R.(2d) 449; 29 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 86 C.C.L.C. 14,039, held that the compulsory check-off provisions abridged Lavigne's freedom of association under the Charter, but not his freedom of expression. The court further held that s. 59(2) did not infringe Lavigne's equality rights, freedom of expression or of associ­ation. Subsequently, in a decision reported in 60 O.R.(2d) 486; 41 D.L.R.(4th) 86; 87 C.C.L.C. 14,044, the court considered the remedy available to Lavigne and made various declarations. The union appealed. Lavigne cross-appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, in a decision reported in 31 O.A.C. 40; 67 O.R.(2d) 536; 56 D.L.R.(4th) 474; 37 C.R.R. 193; 89 C.L.L.C. 14,011, held that the Charter was inapplicable respecting the compulsory check-off provisions and the expenditure by the union of monies collected. However, on the merits, the court held that even if the Charter applied, there was no infringement of Lavigne's Charter rights. The court further held that s. 59(2) did not infringe the Char­ter. Accordingly, the court allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal. In the result, the Court of Appeal dismissed Lavigne's application. Lavigne appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 1852.1

Freedom of speech or expression - Limi­tations on - Labour legislation - Compul­sory check-off of union dues - Agency shop or Rand formula provision - A col­lective agreement governing community college teachers contained an agency shop or Rand formula provision, making it mandatory for all members of the bargain­ing unit to pay an amount equal to regular union dues, regardless of whether the employees were union members - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the compulsory payment did not infringe a non-union member's right to freedom of expression in s. 2(b) of the Charter - See paragraphs 86 to 87, 187 to 222, 280 to 281.

Civil Rights - Topic 2103

Freedom of association - Scope of right - The Supreme Court of Canada, and specifically La Forest, Wilson and McLachlin, JJ., discussed the scope of the right to freedom of association in s. 2(d) of the Charter - The court discussed whether the right included freedom from compelled association or the freedom not to associate - See paragraphs 33 to 42, 154 to 186, 282 to 287.

Civil Rights - Topic 2155

Freedom of association - Limitations on - Labour legislation - Compulsory check-off of union dues - Agency shop or Rand formula provisions - A collective agree­ment governing community college teachers contained an agency shop or Rand formula provision, making it mandatory for all members of the bargaining unit to pay an amount equal to regular union dues, regardless of whether the employees were union members - A majority of the Supreme Court of Canada held that the compulsory payment did not infringe a non-union member's right to freedom of association in s. 2(d) of the Charter - La Forest, Sopinka and Gonthier, JJ., would have held that s. 2(d) was violated to the extent that the money was spent on matters not substantially related to the labour relations process - See paragraphs 43 to 73, 154 to 186, 280 to 304.

Civil Rights - Topic 8311

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Nongovernmental or private interference - Under s. 32(1), the Charter applied only to the exercise of or reliance upon governmental action - A collective agreement governing community college teachers contained an agency shop or Rand formula provision making it man­datory for all members of the bargaining unit to pay an amount equal to regular union dues, regardless of whether the employees were union members - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Charter applied to the mandatory check-off provision, as the bargaining agent for community college employers (the Council of Regents for Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology) was an agent or emana­tion of government - See paragraphs 15 to 31, 116 to 153, 279, 281.

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law - A collective agreement governing community college teachers contained an agency shop or Rand formula provision making it mandatory for all members of the bargaining unit to pay an amount equal to regular union dues, regardless of whether the employees were union members - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the mandatory check-off provision did not violate the right of a non-union member to freedom of expres­sion - A majority of the Supreme Court further held that the provision did not violate a non-union member's right to freedom of association - The Supreme Court further held that even if the Charter had been infringed, the activity complained of was justified under s. 1 of the Charter - See paragraphs 89, 223 to 276, 280, 305.

Labour Law - Topic 9646

Public service labour relations - Collective agreement - Union rights - Compulsory check-off of union dues - Agency shop or Rand formula provision - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1852.1 ].

Labour Law - Topic 9646

Public service labour relations - Collective agreement - Union rights - Compulsory check-off of union dues - Agency shop or Rand formula provision - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2155 ].

Labour Law - Topic 9646

Public service labour relations - Collective agreement - Union rights - Compulsory check-off of union dues - Agency shop or Rand formula provision - [See Civil Rights - Topic 8348 ].

Cases Noticed:

Davidson v. Slaight Communications Inc., [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1038; 93 N.R. 183, consd. [para. 19].

McKinney v. University of Guelph et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 229; 118 N.R. 1, consd. [para. 20].

Bhindi and British Columbia Projectionists Local 348, Re (1986), 29 D.L.R.(4th) 47 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 20].

Douglas/Kwantlen Faculty Association v. Douglas College, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 570; 118 N.R. 340, consd. [para. 21].

Harrison v. University of British Colum­bia; Connell v. University of British Columbia, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 451; 120 N.R. 1, consd. [para. 21].

Stoffman et al. v. Vancouver General Hospital et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 483; 118 N.R. 241, consd. [para. 21].

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1, consd. [para. 34].

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295; [1985] 3 W.W.R. 481; 58 N.R. 81; 60 A.R. 161; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 37 Alta. L.R.(2d) 97; 85 C.L.L.C. 14,023; 13 C.R.R. 64, refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Lyons, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 309; 80 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 40].

International Association of Machinists v. Street (1961), 367 U.S. 740, refd to. [para. 50].

Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977), 431 U.S. 209, consd. [para. 65].

Ellis v. Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks (1984), 466 U.S. 435; 104 S. Ct. 1883, consd. [para. 66].

Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association (1991), 59 U.S.L.W. 4544, refd to. [para. 66].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335; 26 D.L.R.(4th) 200; 50 C.R.(3d) 1; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 321, appld. [para. 75].

Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927; 94 N.R. 167; 24 O.A.C. 2; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 577, consd. [para. 86].

Lathrop v. Donohue (1961), 367 U.S. 820, refd to. [para. 87].

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), 319 U.S. 624, refd to. [para. 87].

Dolphin Delivery Ltd. et al. v. Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 580 et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 573; 71 N.R. 83; 33 D.L.R.(4th) 175, consd. [para. 108].

Baldwin and B.C. Government Employee's Union, Re (1986), 28 D.L.R.(4th) 301 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 123].

Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology, Re, [1967] O.L.R.B. Rep. 829, refd to. [para. 142].

Sault College of Applied Arts and Tech­nology, Re, [1985] O.L.R.B. Rep. 1293, refd to. [para. 142].

Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada v. Northwest Territories (Commissioner), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 367; 112 N.R. 269, consd. [para. 160].

R. v. Skinner, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1235; 109 N.R. 241; 98 N.S.R.(2d) 181; 263 A.P.R. 181, consd. [para. 161].

Arlington Crane Service Ltd. v. Ontario (Minister of Labour) (1988), 67 O.R.(2d) 225 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 163].

Pruden Building Ltd. v. Construction & General Workers' Union Local 92 (1984), 55 A.R. 371; 13 D.L.R.(4th) 584 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 163].

Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers' Inter­national Union v. Imperial Oil Ltd., [1963] S.C.R. 584, consd. [para. 165].

Young, James and Webster v. United Kingdom (1980), 3 E.H.R.R. 20, consd. [para. 168].

Reference Re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486; 63 N.R. 266; [1986] 1 W.W.R. 481; 24 D.L.R.(4th) 536; 23 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 170].

R. v. Turpin, Siddiqui and Clauzel, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1296; 96 N.R. 115; 34 O.A.C. 115; 69 C.R.(3d) 97; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 8, refd to. [para. 174].

Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143; 91 N.R. 255; [1989] 2 W.W.R. 289; 56 D.L.R.(4th) 1, consd. [para. 176].

Merry v. Manitoba and Manitoba Medical Association (1989), 58 Man.R.(2d) 221 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 180].

Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada et al. v. Canada (1991), 120 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 189].

R. v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697; 117 N.R. 1; 114 A.R. 81, refd to. [para. 189].

Reference Re ss. 193 and 195.1(1)(c) of the Criminal Code (Man.), [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1123; 109 N.R. 81; 68 Man.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 189].

Royal College of Dental Surgeons (Ont.) et al. v. Rocket and Price, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 232; 111 N.R. 161; 40 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 189].

Chaussure Brown's Inc. et al. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712; 90 N.R. 84; 19 Q.A.C. 69, consd. [para. 195].

Wooley v. Maynard (1977), 430 U.S. 705, consd. [para. 207].

Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974), 418 U.S. 241, consd. [para. 207].

Elrod v. Burns (1976), 427 U.S. 347, refd to. [para. 207].

PruneYard Shopping Centre v. Robins (1980), 447 U.S. 74, consd. [para. 207].

National Bank of Canada v. Retail Clerks' International Union, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 269; 53 N.R. 203, consd. [para. 213].

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Mani­toba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832, [1988] 5 W.W.R. 544; 54 Man.R.(2d) 81 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 219].

Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al. v. National Citizens' Coalition Inc. et al. (1990), 38 O.A.C. 70; 90 D.T.C. 6326 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 219].

Isabey v. Manitoba Health Services Com­mission, [1986] 4 W.W.R. 310; 40 Man.R.(2d) 198 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 219].

MacKay et al. v. Manitoba, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 357; 99 N.R. 116; 61 Man.R.(2d) 270, consd. [para. 221].

Prior v. Canada (1989), 101 N.R. 401 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 221].

R. v. Videoflicks et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713; 71 N.R. 161; 19 O.A.C. 239; 30 C.C.C.(3d) 385, refd to. [para. 224].

Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) et al., [1987] 2 S.C.R. 2; 63 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 230].

Fraser v. Public Service Staff Relations Board, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 455; 77 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 230].

Ford Motor Co. of Canada Ltd. v. U.A.W. - C.I.O., reprinted in (1989), 1 Can. Lab. L. Rep. 2150, consd. [para. 232].

Adams Mine, Cliffs of Canada Ltd., Re, [1982] O.L.R.B. Rep. 1767, consd. [para. 238].

Collymore v. Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, [1969] 2 All E.R. 1207, refd to. [para. 247].

Federal Republic of Germany and Rauca, Re (1983), 41 O.R.(2d) 225 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 264].

R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284; 69 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 273].

Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1326; 102 N.R. 321; 103 A.R. 321, refd to. [para. 282].

Thomson Newspapers Ltd. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Combines Investigation Act et al., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 425; 106 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 282].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1 [paras. 26, 69, 73-74, 102-103, 114, 118, 170, 177, 180, 203, 223-224, 241, 254, 281, 300]; sect. 2(a) [para. 40]; sect. 2(b) [paras. 1, 11, 40, 90, 95, 101, 114, 125, 127, 173, 183, 187-194, 196-197, 199-200, 205-206, 216-223, 281, 286]; sect. 2(d) [paras. 1, 11, 35-36, 39-43, 46, 49, 60, 71, 84-85, 90, 95, 100, 102-103, 110, 114, 154-156, 158-164, 169, 172-177, 180, 186, 223, 281-282, 284, 286-287, 290, 292, 300, 302-303]; sect. 7 [paras. 40, 183]; sect. 24(1) [para. 105]; sect. 32 [paras. 11-13, 97, 114, 116, 118, 124, 131, 133-134, 139, 141, 143, 145].

Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 74, generally [para. 3]; sect. 1(g) [para. 235]; sect. 2(3) [para. 138]; sect. 51 [paras. 7, 95, 104, 112, 148]; sect. 52 [paras. 7, 95, 104, 112, 148]; sect. 53 [paras. 7, 13, 95, 99, 104, 148, 225]; sect. 53(1) [paras. 17-18, 112]; sect. 53(3) [para. 235]; sect. 59(2) [para. 7]; sect. 68, sect. 71, sect. 76 [para. 235].

Constitution Act, 1982, sect. 52 [paras. 103-104].

Department of Education Amendment Act, S.O. 1965, c. 28 [para. 140].

Employment Equity Act, S.C. 1986, c. 31, generally [para. 145].

Industrial Relations Act, S.P.E.I. 1962, c. 18, sect. 48 [para. 261].

Labour Act, S.P.E.I. 1971, c. 35, sect. 76(1)(a) [para. 261].

Labour Code of British Columbia, S.B.C. 1973, c. 122, sect. 151 [para. 261].

Labour Relations Amendment Act, S.B.C. 1961, c. 31, sect. 5 [para. 261].

Ministry of Colleges and Universities Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 272, sect. 4, sect. 5 [para. 137]; sect. 5(2) [paras. 3, 138].

Ministry of Colleges and Universities Act Regulation, R.R.O. 1980, reg. 640 [para. 138], sect. 6(1) [para. 138].

Public Service Act Regulations, R.R.O. 1970, reg. 403/69 [para. 233]; reg. 749, sect. 45 [para. 6].

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, art. 20 [para. 39].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Aaron, Benjamin, Some Aspects of the Union's Duty of Fair Representation (1961), 22 Ohio St. L.J. 39, p. 62 [para. 244].

Adams, George W., Canadian Labour Law: A Comprehensive Text (1985), pp. 16-17 [para. 225].

Beatty, David M., Labour is not a Com­modity, in Barry J. Reiter and John Swan (Eds.), Studies in Contract Law (1980) [para. 245].

Cantor, Norman L., Forced Payments to Service Institutions and Constitutional Interests in Ideological Non-Association (1983), 36 Rutgers L. Rev. 3, pp. 6-7 [para. 55]; 7 [para. 297]; 25 [para. 181].

Cavalluzzo, Paul J.J., Freedom of Associ­ation -- Its Effects Upon Collective Bargaining and Trade Unions (1988), 13 Queen's L.J. 267, pp. 287-288 [para. 226].

Cox, Archibald, Law and the National Labour Policy (1960), p. 107 [para. 302].

Debates of the Twenty-Third Legislature of the Province of Ontario, March 8, 1950, pp. B-10, B-11; April 4, 1950, pp. B-7, B-8, B-9; April 5, 1950, pp. DD-20, DD-21, EE-1, EE-2; April 6, 1950, p. EE-4 [para. 231].

Emerson, Thomas I., Freedom of Associ­ation and Freedom of Expression (1964), 74 Yale L.J. 1, p. 4 [para. 35].

Etherington, Brian, Freedom of Associ­ation and Compulsory Union Dues: Towards a Purposive Conception of a Freedom To Not Associate (1987), 19 Ottawa L. Rev. 1, generally [para. 182]; pp. 34 [para. 243]; 43 [paras. 57, 60]; 43-44 [para. 59].

Horn, Robert, Groups and the Constitution (1971), p. 3 [para. 41].

Kahn-Freund, Otto, On Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law (1974), 37 Mod. L. Rev. 1, p. 21 [para. 264].

Little, Walter, Collective Bargaining in the Ontario Government Service: A Report, s.n. 1969 [para. 262].

Raggi, Reena, An Independent Right to Freedom of Association (1977), 12 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 1 [para. 171].

Swinton, Katherine, Application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Free­doms, in Walter S. Tarnopolsky and Gérald-A. Beaudoin, The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), pp. 41, 51, 57-58 [para. 145].

Tocqueville, Alexis de, Democracy in America (1945), vol. 1, p. 196 [para. 34].

Tribe, Laurence H., Constitutional Choices (1985), p. 202 [para. 269].

Weiler, Paul C., Reconcilable Differences: New Directions in Canadian Labour Law (1980), pp. 124-125, 143-145 [para. 52].

Weiler, Paul C., The Charter at Work: Reflections on the Constitutionalizing of Labour and Employment Law (1990), 40 U.T.L.J. 117, p. 169 [para. 302].

Woods, Report of the Federal Task Force on Labour Relations [para. 263].

Counsel:

Dennis O'Connor, Q.C., Ronald Foerster and Diane Oleskiw, for the appellant;

Stephen T. Goudge, Q.C., and Ian F. McGilp, for the respondent, the Ontario Public Service Employees Union;

Brenda J. Bowlby and Stephen J. Shamie, for the respondent, the Ontario Council of Regents for Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology;

Edward R. Sojonky, Q.C., and M.N. Kinnear, for the intervener, the Attorney General of Canada;

Robert E. Charney and S.A. Kennett, for the intervenor, the Attorney General for Ontario;

Jean Bouchard, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Quebec;

Jeffrey Sack, Q.C., Ethan Poskanzer and Steven M. Barrett, for the intervenors, the Canadian Labour Congress and the Ontario Federation of Labour;

J. Cameron Nelson and John McNamee, for the intervenor, the National Union of Provincial Government Employees;

Guylaine Henri, for the intervenor, the Confederation of National Trade Unions.

No one appeared for the intervenor, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

Solicitors of Record:

Borden & Elliot, Toronto, Ontario, for the appellant;

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent, the Ontario Public Service Employees Union;

Hicks, Morley, Hamilton, Stewart, Storie, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent, the Ontario Council of Regents for Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology;

Department of Justice, Ottawa, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Canada;

Robert E. Charney, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Attorney General for Ontario;

Françoise Saint-Martin and Jean Bouchard, Sainte-Foy, Quebec, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Quebec;

Sack, Goldblatt, Mitchell, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenors, the Cana­dian Labour Congress and the Ontario Federation of Labour;

Nelson, McNamee, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the National Union of Provincial Government Employees;

Sauvé, Ménard et Ass., Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenor, the Confederation of National Trade Unions;

Lerner & Associates, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

This appeal was heard before Wilson, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada on June 18 and 19, 1990.

The decision of the Supreme Court was delivered in both official languages on June 27, 1991, when the following opinions were filed:

La Forest, J. (Sopinka and Gonthier, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 89;

Wilson, J. (L'Heureux-Dubé, J., con­curring) - see paragraphs 90 to 278;

Cory, J. - see paragraphs 279 and 280;

McLachlin, J. - see paragraphs 281 to 305.