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
Charter of Rights and FreedomsCOVID-19Employment RegulationQuebec

COVID-19 and Public Education Collective Agreements in Quebec

by Travis Fast March 20, 2020
written by Travis Fast March 20, 2020

Written by Travis Fast and Martin Dumas, Laval University

On Thursday morning the 19th of March 2020 the Canadian press was buzzing with news that the government of Quebec had suspended collective agreements in the public education sector.  In its online edition, CTV Montreal ran the story COVID-19: Quebec teachers in shock after government suspends collective agreements.  As reported in the story, the president of the Centrale des syndicats du Québec (CSQ) said that, “they were told their entire collective agreements no longer apply when there are certain provisions in place, such as emergency measures.”

Although the story and the information was misleading in some respects, it nonetheless raises a couple of pertinent questions and concerns.  In this short blog post we will address each aspect in turn.

The misleading aspects of the story

The first point to make clear is that s. 118 and 123 of the Public Health Act[1] give the government a broad range of powers once a public health emergency has been declared including the general power to “order any other measure necessary to protect the health of the population.”[2]

However, as required and published in the Gazette Officielle,[3] the government made very clear that it was not suspending collective agreements but rather making specific, albeit important, amendments to “collective and other agreements… between school boards, on the one hand, and all unions, on the other hand.”   Three specific aspects of these agreements were subject to ad hoc amendment: (1) the assignment and classification of personnel; (2) work scheduling; and (3) “compensation that is additional to the remuneration or compensation paid for normal work hours.”

As important as these three aspects of collective agreements are, they do not exhaust collective agreements and thus cannot fairly be said to be tantamount to suspending collective agreements in the public education sector. Perhaps also noteworthy is that the amendments were made specifically to agreements covering public sector workers in the education sector and not to all public sector workers.

Pertinent questions and concerns

To our minds, one pertinent question this issue raises is why did the government chose the kludge of dictating rather than negotiating or at the very least consulting with the respective unions?  To be sure, emergency situations may alter the modalities of the duty to bargain in good faith. But does the current situation, in which teacher’s unions show signs of collaboration with state authorities, really support the failure to comply with such a fundamental duty?

A second pertinent question is why did the government think it necessary to provide themselves the power to abrogate compensation requirements above normal work hour levels? These are questions that should be addressed by the government and are examples of prematurely ignored subjects of negotiations.

Outside of these two general questions, the amendments raise some important concerns as to potential abuses of these ad hoc powers.  Abuse of power is a real concern as some formulations are rather vague, as in “to allow the employer to meet needs.” And authorities will also have to interpret the text sensibly: if “Personnel members may therefore be assigned to tasks under another job title”, such a transition will necessarily have to take the competence of the people assigned into consideration.

Travis Fast & Martin Dumas, “COVID-19 and Public Education Collective Agreements in Quebec” Canadian Law of Work Forum (March 20 2020): https://lawofwork.ca/covid-19-and-public-education-collective-agreements-in-quebec/


[1] S-2.2 – Public Health Act

[2] S-2.2, Public Health Act, s.123.

[3] GAZETTE OFFICIELLE DU QUÉBEC, March 18, 2020, Vol. 152, No. 12A

#Quebec #COVID #CollectiveBargaining #Teachers
0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
Travis Fast

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Targeted Basic Income: An Equitable Policy Response to COVID-19
next post
Responding to a potential COVID-19 case in the workplace – steady as she goes

You may also like

What Might a Right to Strike for Non-Union...

December 16, 2022

Lessons for the Railway Showdown from a Victory...

November 30, 2022

Court Strikes Down Ontario’s Punitive Public Sector Wage...

November 29, 2022

New Video: Standing Up to the Notwithstanding Clause

November 25, 2022

On the Right to Strike in Canada and...

November 1, 2022

UPDATE: Ontario Invokes Notwithstanding Clause, Crushes Labour Rights...

October 31, 2022

Right of B.C. Workers to Refuse to Cross...

September 26, 2022

Why Gig Workers Are NOT Independent Contractors: A...

September 19, 2022

CUPW’s Unfair Labour Practice Complaint Against Uber Raises...

September 16, 2022

How Canadian Unions Responded to Vaccine Mandates, Protests,...

March 17, 2022

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 ·
10h

I can’t believe that Almost Famous came out 23 years ago.

Time is flying by.

Reply on Twitter 1622776388179705859 Retweet on Twitter 1622776388179705859 3 Like on Twitter 1622776388179705859 14 Twitter 1622776388179705859
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
11h

I had an LLM student who had a part-time job phantom writing labor arbitration decisions based on arbitrator’s notes and instructions.

Like law clerks do for judges (except parties don’t know about the phantom arb writer).

Is using a machine different? Interesting debate.

Valerio De Stefano @valeriodeste

The crucial part starts on p. 5, where the Court reports the answers to the legal questions they posed to ChatGPT. Then, at the end of p. 6, the Court adopts the arguments given in these answers as grounds for its decision.

Reply on Twitter 1622759377944952834 Retweet on Twitter 1622759377944952834 5 Like on Twitter 1622759377944952834 8 Twitter 1622759377944952834
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
12h

Quebec passed anti-scab legislation in 1977, BC in 1993, & Ontario 1993-95.

Hysterical claims that these laws cause job losses & loss of investment aren't supported by evidence. Businesses just don't like them.

Short 🧵

1/

Seamus O'Regan Jr @SeamusORegan

We’re banning replacement workers, as we said on Oct. 19th.

We’re working with unions and employers to get the balance right.

As agreed, government will introduce legislation by the end of this year.

Reply on Twitter 1622745098088861702 Retweet on Twitter 1622745098088861702 16 Like on Twitter 1622745098088861702 39 Twitter 1622745098088861702
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.