The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Could York Students Sue York and CUPE?

by David Doorey January 3, 2009
written by David Doorey January 3, 2009

Go to fullsize image There have been rumblings on blogs and facebook accounts since the beginning of the strike here at York that students (and perhaps their parents!) should sue York and/or CUPE because the strike has canceled classes and caused financial difficulties for students. Today in the Globe and Mail, there is mention of talks about a possible ‘class action’ suit. Could students really sue York and the Union?
Lawyers know that the first question you’d have to address is, what is the ’cause of action’. In other words, what law or contract term has York or the Union violated? Right away, advocates of a lawsuit would run into difficulties here. Keep in mind that the strike is completely legal, backed by the full force of the state in the form of the Labour Relations Act, which sets out a series of preconditions for a legal strike, all of which CUPE satisfied. So CUPE and the strikers have done absolutely nothing illegal by engaging in the strike. I think their picket line is illegal: they are clearly obstructing ingress and egress onto the university’s property, which is a tort. But neither the state nor the employer has complained about this, the picket line has been remarkably peaceful, and in any event, it is not the picket line that has caused damage to the students/parents. It is the strike, or at least the university’s decision to cancel classes, that has caused the hardship.
So has York violated any law or contract term? I can’t think of any statute that has been violated. Can anyone? What about a contract term? Assume there is a contract between students and York, the consideration for which is that the student pays fees and the university, in exchange, provides a service: education. I suppose the argument would be that the university has failed to provide its end of the bargain by canceling classes.
I see several problems with this argument in contract. One is that it is not clear yet whether in fact the university has failed to provide the education promised. It might come late, or in a different form, but at this point, the University does intend to complete the year. But the bigger problem is that the contract presumably does not include a term that requires the university to continue classes in the event that the teachers engage in a lawful strike and are therefore unavailable to teach. Can any York student point to a term in a contract they have with the University that requires York to continue to teach classes as scheduled in the event of a lawful strike by its teachers?
If the university actually cancels the year or a term, then I’d think there’d be a pretty strong argument that students are entitled to a refund of tuition for the lost year/term. We are not there yet though.
Can any readers suggest a cause of action that students could rely on in a lawsuit against York or CUPE?

5 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Top 10 Labour & Employment Law Articles (Dec. 30th)
next post
Should the Government or York Order Striking Workers to Vote on the Employer's Offer?

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

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

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

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

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to Follow

Law Prof. Talking #labor & #employment #law to the masses. @YorkUniversity @OsgoodeNews @LSELaw @CLJEHarvard @Jacobin @OnLaborBlog https://t.co/5V9r8VPHsh

TheLawofWork
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
55m

President Biden calls for passage of #PROAct

Act bans employer captive audience anti-union meetings;

Expands def of “employee” to capture essentially what we call “dependent contractors” in Canada;

Increase penalties for unfair labor practices;

Doesn’t adopt card-check.

Steven Greenhouse @greenhousenyt

President Biden: "I'm so sick and tired of companies breaking the law when workers are seeking to unionize"

Reply on Twitter 1623164729530191874 Retweet on Twitter 1623164729530191874 Like on Twitter 1623164729530191874 4 Twitter 1623164729530191874
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
5h

My fingers are just too big to play an A chord on the #guitar.

Otherwise I would be a rock star. This is the only thing holding me back.

Reply on Twitter 1623109078431027200 Retweet on Twitter 1623109078431027200 Like on Twitter 1623109078431027200 12 Twitter 1623109078431027200
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
5h

Not seen comparable stats for Canada.There are terminations, but also better laws in most Canadian jurisdictions, including

- remedial certification
- interim reinstatement
- card-check/quick votes

“1 in 5 workers in US is fired for organizing a union” https://onlabor.org/labor-law-reform-is-needed-for-unions-to-succeed/

Reply on Twitter 1623103873161330688 Retweet on Twitter 1623103873161330688 Like on Twitter 1623103873161330688 1 Twitter 1623103873161330688
Load More

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • 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
  • Newfoundland
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • 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.