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

Here is Bill C-39: Restoring Rail Services Act. Meet the New Bill, (Not) the Same as the Old Bill(s)

by David Doorey May 28, 2012
written by David Doorey May 28, 2012

Here is the link to the newest in a line of highly interventionist federal legislation restricting collective bargaining and the right to strike and lockout.
This one is called Bill C-39: An Act to provide for the continuation and resumption of rail service operations
I’ve given it a quick read.  Apparently, I was wrong in my post from earlier this morning. This Bill does not follow the model of the Air Canada and Canada Post laws. It still bans the right to strike, imposes ridiculously high fines for non-compliance, and confers on the Minister the unilateral right to select her favorite arbitrator while prohibiting the right of the parties to challenge her selection.   But  it also drops a couple of restraints on the arbitration process that appeared in the earlier legislation. In particular, unlike those laws, this Bill:

1.    Does not require Final Offer Selection as the method of interest arbitration.  I assume that means that the parties can select their own process, or otherwise the normal process  will apply, whereby the parties make submissions and the arbitrator is free to craft the award he or she thinks is sensible.
2.  Does not include the usual list of criteria for the arbitrator to consider, which in the earlier laws, included such things as “the competitiveness” of the employer in the short and long term, the employer’s earlier offers, the employer’s need for flexibility, the need for the conditions of work to be ‘consistent with’ the employer’s competitors, and pressures on the employer that might result from short-term pension funding obligations.  As I noted before, these criteria appear to favour the employer’s interests, which undermined the perceived fairness of the model as whole.  I questioned on several occasions why the government would so openly side with one side in a private dispute, when it was so plainly obvious that all this achieved was greater anger and resentment of the workers.  What good will come from the government’s attempts to restrain the arbitrator’s discretion?

Maybe the Air Canada Pilots caused the government to blink slightly.  The pilots demonstrated how workers can still wreak havoc on an employer when restrained by what they perceive to be unbalanced, unfair strike banning legislation.  Railways can also easily be shut down or delayed considerably by tired or sick drivers.  The law is still a blatant violation Canada’s international law obligations to respect the right to strike (explained here), and may still be the subject of a Charter challenge.  But it at least appears to substitute a process that gives the perception of being more even-handed than this government’s earlier interventions.  And perception can make a difference in these things.

What do you think?    Is this Bill more or less acceptable to you, given that it does not include the usual list of employer-friendly criteria for the arbitrator to consider in making the award?
Why do you think Minister Raitt loosened the reigns slightly on the process of arbitration that will apply here, compared to the Canada Post and Air Canada situations?

4 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
Feds Ready to Introduce Yet Another Back-to-Work Bill, this time for CP Rail
next post
"This is Not Collective Bargaining; this is collective bullying": Senator Cowan. Great Exchange in Canadian Senate on Back to Work Legislation

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

Subscribe via Email

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

Join 337 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦Follow

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

David J. Doorey🇨🇦
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
36m

Contract Law folks:

Story: @KDTrey5 (Kevin Durant) demands 'fire coach Nash' or trade me! [Or else what? Durant will breach his own contract by not working? Unclear].

Could Nash argue tort of inducing breach of contract?

Could Nash/Nets argue tort of intimidation?

Discuss.

Shams Charania@ShamsCharania

In a meeting with Nets owner Joe Tsai, Kevin Durant reiterated his trade request and informed Tsai that Tsai needs to choose between Durant or the pairing of general manager Sean Marks and coach Steve Nash, sources say.

Story: https://theathletic.com/3485297/2022/08/08/kevin-durant-nets-trade-steve-nash/

Reply on Twitter 1556730963077521408Retweet on Twitter 1556730963077521408Like on Twitter 1556730963077521408Twitter 1556730963077521408
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
55m

This is not streamed I take it?

Not all of us get to hang out in L.A. 😀

Barry Eidlin@eidlin

Interrupting the fashion report to invite people to a discussion I’m moderating tomorrow (8/9) at noon at #ASA2022 on the future of collective bargaining in the US, feat. @veenadubal, Bill Gould & @JLotesta. Should be great!

Reply on Twitter 1556726348865015809Retweet on Twitter 1556726348865015809Like on Twitter 15567263488650158091Twitter 1556726348865015809
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
3h

Looks great!

I took an international labor law course at LSE/Kings College taught by Keith Ewing, Brian Bercusson, Aileen McColgan, and Paul Davies.

Incredible course. And so important.

Desiree LeClercq@LeclercqDesiree

Excited to teach my new #internationallaborlaw course critically considering how labor rights are designed & enforced. The class balances decolonial theory w/ practical experiences. My syllabus (with names redacted) below. 1/

Reply on Twitter 1556698559650603008Retweet on Twitter 15566985596506030081Like on Twitter 15566985596506030086Twitter 1556698559650603008
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
  • 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.