Saskatoon Police Association v. Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners, (2015) 457 Sask.R. 150 (CA)

• Judge: Jackson, Klebuc and Ryan-Froslie, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: November 25, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2015), 457 Sask.R. 150 (CA);2015 SKCA 35

Sask. Police v. Sask. Police Commrs. (2015), 457 Sask.R. 150 (CA);

    632 W.A.C. 150

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. AP.042

Saskatoon City Police Association (appellant/applicant) v. Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners (respondent/respondent)

(CACV2513; 2015 SKCA 35)

Indexed As: Saskatoon Police Association v. Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Jackson, Klebuc and Ryan-Froslie, JJ.A.

April 14, 2015.

Summary:

The Saskatoon Police Association applied for judicial review of a decision of the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board (LRB) which favoured the Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners (Board). The LRB dismissed the Association's complaint of an unfair labour practice on jurisdictional grounds.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 436 Sask.R. 81, dismissed the application. The Association appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Labour Law - Topic 438

Labour relations boards and judicial review - Boards - Jurisdiction - Provincial boards - C.L., a special constable with the Saskatoon Police Service, was off work on an approved medical leave - She collected financial benefits pursuant to the sick bank created under the collective agreement - In late 2003 or early 2004, C.L. was charged with a breach of internal disciplinary rules - This breach consisted of three major offences pursuant to the Police Act and the Municipal Police Discipline Regulations - The Saskatoon Police Association was notified of the charges and a disciplinary hearing was set - The Association attended at C.L.'s discipline hearing but only as an observer as C.L. had opted to represent herself - At this and all other stages of the discipline process, C.L. had rejected Association representation - C.L. obtained an adjournment - The hearing never reconvened - A series of negotiations occurred between the Chief of Police and C.L. and resulted in an agreement - The Association was told nothing - The Association took the position that while the agreement might well have settled the disciplinary proceedings, there was also an effect on C.L.'s terms and conditions of employment, notably termination of the sick bank benefits, severance pay, resignation from employment and all other benefits extant under the collective agreement - The Association asserted that it ought to have had a chance to address these matters as bargaining agent for C.L. - Accordingly, the Association filed an unfair labour practice complaint with the Labour Relations Board (LRB) - The LRB dismissed the application, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint - The Association applied for judicial review, asserting that the LRB erred when it determined that the decision in Regina Police Association Inc. and Shotton v. Board of Police Commissioners of Regina (SCC 2000) stood as the controlling authority and essentially decided jurisdiction - The chambers judge dismissed the application - The court agreed with the LRB's decision that the essential character of the dispute was disciplinary in nature - That being so, the LRB properly deferred to the statutory scheme and refused jurisdiction - The LRB properly applied the Shotton case - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the Association's appeal - The chambers judge made no reversible error.

Labour Law - Topic 9053

Public service labour relations - The board - Jurisdiction - General - [See Labour Law - Topic 438 ].

Cases Noticed:

Regina Police Association Inc. and Shotton v. Board of Police Commissioners of Regina, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 360; 251 N.R. 16; 189 Sask.R. 23; 216 W.A.C. 23; 2000 SCC 14, refd to. [para. 14].

New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190; 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 22].

Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (Que.) v. Quebec (Attorney General) et al., [2004] 2 S.C.R. 185; 321 N.R. 290; 2004 SCC 39, refd to. [para. 22].

Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929; 183 N.R. 241; 82 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 25].

Sabo v. Board of Police Commissioners of Saskatoon et al. (2004), 241 Sask.R. 54; 313 W.A.C. 54; 2004 SKCA 3, dist. [para. 29].

Board of Police Commissioners of Saskatoon v. Saskatoon City Police Association et al. (2000), 200 Sask.R. 292; 2000 SKQB 481, refd to. [para. 31].

Board of Police Commissioners of Saskatoon v. Saskatoon City Police Association et al. (2001), 213 Sask.R. 224; 260 W.A.C. 224; 2001 SKCA 82, refd to. [para. 32].

Regina Police Association Inc. and Shotton v. Board of Police Commissioners of Regina (1998), 168 Sask.R. 197; 173 W.A.C. 197 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Counsel:

Gary L. Bainbridge, for the appellant;

Robert J. Gibbings, Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on November 25, 2014, by Jackson, Klebuc and Ryan-Froslie, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Klebuc, J.A., on April 14, 2015.