Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
Law of Work Archive

City of Toronto Rejects Motion to Require Council Approval of a Lockout of its Employees

by David Doorey December 1, 2011
written by David Doorey December 1, 2011

Under the current set up in the City of Toronto, a small committee (the Employee and Labour Relations Committee) has the very large power to shut down most of the City’s public services. That Committee is tasked with giving guidance and updates to the full Council on HRM and labour relations issues.  However, as presented drafted, the Committee also has the power to lockout any or all of the City’s unionized workers, without putting the matter to the full Council for a vote.
This power predates the present administration.  However,  until the Mayors Ford were elected, the thought of a government locking out or imposing contract terms on its own workers was highly remote.  Moreover, if this Committee can order a lockout without Council approval, then it can presumably also order wages and benefits of unionized workers to be cut the moment that the parties are in a legal strike/lockout position, as action that could force the workers to go on strike.  Either way, whether or not their is a work stoppage in Toronto this winter rests largely in the hands of the small group of pro-Ford councillors on the Committee.
Councillor John Filion thinks thats problematic, since a lockout will have significant impacts on the city’s population.  He thinks that such an important matter should go to the full elected Council, and not be decided by a small sub-committee.   He filed a motion that would require a decision to lockout workers, or to unilaterally alter the terms of employment of City employees during the open period [when an employer can ignore the terms of the collective agreement and implement different terms] be made by Council, and not the Employee and Labour Relations Committee.
That motion failed in a vote this afternoon by the slimmest of margins, 18 to 19 (with 8 Councillors not voting), although I think the motion needed 2/3 to carry.  Here is the motion. And here is a breakdown of how the Councillors voted.

What do you think about this?
Should the decision to lockout the City’s workforce be a matter for debate in the full elected Council, or is it fine to allow this decision to be decided by a small sub-committee, without any vote by elected officials?

 

0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is the Director of the School of HRM at York and Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and on the Advisory Board of the Osgoode Certificate program in Labour Law. He is a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program and a member of the International Advisory Committee on Harvard University’s Clean Slate Project, which is re-imaging labor law for the 21st century

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

previous post
Labour Law Scholarship: Doorey's New Article on Workplace Law Reform
next post
Canada's Income Inequality Highest Ever Recorded–What's Broken?

You may also like

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

A Successful Strike Vote is All That Stands...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Putin Invites Trump to Moscow for Second Meeting...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 218 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

CLWFFollow

CLWF
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
19 Feb

Tenants have associations, but landlords can't just ignore them. Is Landlord Tenant Law the next frontier in Freedom of Association litigation?

@TheLawofWork considers:

“The Striking Absence of Freedom of Association in Landlord and Tenant Law”

https://lawofwork.ca/the-striking-absence-of-freedom-of-association-in-landlord-and-tenant-law/

Reply on Twitter 1362821027458334724Retweet on Twitter 13628210274583347243Like on Twitter 13628210274583347244Twitter 1362821027458334724
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
19 Feb

Tenants have associations, but landlords can't just ignore them. Is Landlord Tenant Law the next frontier in Freedom of Association litigation?

@TheLawofWork considers:

“The Striking Absence of Freedom of Association in Landlord and Tenant Law”

https://lawofwork.ca/the-striking-absence-of-freedom-of-association-in-landlord-and-tenant-law/

Reply on Twitter 1362821027458334724Retweet on Twitter 13628210274583347243Like on Twitter 13628210274583347244Twitter 1362821027458334724
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
15 Feb

New post from @TheLawofWork examining unfair labor practice complaint filed by UFCW vs @Uber in Toronto, complaint attached. Thanks to @WrightHenryLLP for permission to post:

"Real Pleadings: Has Uber Created a New Service to Avoid Unionization?"

https://lawofwork.ca/uberblackulp/

Reply on Twitter 1361345482510000131Retweet on Twitter 1361345482510000131Like on Twitter 1361345482510000131Twitter 1361345482510000131
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.