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
Collective BargainingComparative Work LawLaw of Work ArchiveOLRBTransnational LawUnions and Collective Bargaining

Is the NBA Lockout Illegal in Canada?

by David Doorey July 1, 2011
written by David Doorey July 1, 2011

By Professor David Doorey, July 1, 2011

HAPPY CANADA DAY!  The NBA may find Canada to be a big pain in the ass.

Here’s an issue that occasionally arises in the pro sports leagues that have Canadian franchises.  Like the NBA.  Today, the NBA “locked out” its players. That lockout is no doubt legal under American labor law.  But the Toronto Raptors franchise is governed not by American labor law, but by Ontario labour law.  The rules are difficult.   Is the lockout of the Toronto Raptors legal under Ontario law?

The pro leagues have not fared well on that issue so far.  Consider this case from 1995 involving the lockout of NBA referees. This was before the Raptors’ had a franchise, but the NBA played regular exhibition games in Toronto.   The Ontario Labour Relations Board ruled that the NBA had not complied with Ontario laws governing when a lockout is lawful.  Since the NBA was employing workers in Ontario during the exhibition games, it was not entitled to lockout them out without first complying with Ontario laws.  Therefore, the lockout of referees, although legal in America, was illegal in Ontario.  A similar ruling was made in regards to the lockout of major league umpires also in 1995–the lockout was legal in the U.S., but umpires could not be locked out for Blue Jay home games.

The key section under Ontario law is 74 of the Labour Relations Act:

74.       (2) Where no collective agreement is in operation, no employee shall strike and no employer shall lock out an employee until the Minister has appointed a conciliation officer or a mediator under this Act and,
(a)        seven days have elapsed after the day the Minister has released or is deemed pursuant to subsection 115 (3) to have released to the parties the report of a conciliation board or mediator; or
(b)        fourteen days have elapsed after the day the Minister has released or is deemed pursuant to subsection 115 (3) to have released to the parties a notice that he or she does not consider it advisable to appoint a conciliation board.

I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that these conditions have not been satisfied by the NBA in this case.  Has the NBA met with Ontario conciliators, and received a “no board” (what we call the section 74(2)(a) report), and then waited 14 days?  If not, then the NBA lockout is probably unlawful in Toronto.

The Ontario Board has discretion in terms of remedies for unlawful lockouts (in section 101).  In the earlier umpire case, Major League Baseball argued that the Board should not do anything about the violation.  The Board responded:

17.       In any event, we do not think that we should decline to apply Ontario law simply because it is novel to do so, or because there may be collective bargaining consequences, or because one side may reap a temporary tactical advantage – any more than we would be inclined to exempt a local branch plant from the application of Ontario law where the same arguments might be made. It may be that the inability to strike, lock-out, or use replacement umpires in Ontario at this time has an effect on the ongoing collective bargaining, or introduces a new “wrinkle” into the collective bargaining process. However, we see no obvious reason why this should be an impediment to settlement, nor should it create an obstacle that cannot be overcome by bargaining in good faith – an obligation that the parties have in all jurisdictions. Certainly it is no reason not to apply the law at all.

In the old umpires’ case, the OLRB allowed a replacement ref for one game, but then made the decision active for the next Blue Jays home series in order to give the parties time to consider the impact of the decision.

In the current NBA lockout, as I understand it, players don’t usually get paid until the fall.   If true, then the Raptors aren’t losing any pay through the summer as a result of the lockout.   In theory, once the Raptors’ lose a pay cheque due to an unlawful lockout, they could seek a remedy from the OLRB, were the Board to rule that the Raptors cannot be locked out.
What do you labour lawyers/sports lawyers think?  Do you think the union will bring an unlawful lockout application to the OLRB?  If so, what do you think the OLRB would do about it?

0 comment
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
Q&A: Should we Replace Common Law "Reasonable Notice" with Fixed (Higher) Statutory Notice of Termination?
next post
Linda McQuaig References Doorey in Piece on Royals and Unions

You may also like

Is Memorial University Illegally Preventing Workers from Joining...

February 2, 2023

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

R.O. MacDowell: Who Defines Appropriate Bargaining Units After...

October 10, 2022

(Video) Professor Doorey on ‘Micro Labour Law’ Below...

October 6, 2022

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

September 26, 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 ·
1h

Ya, I wrote a blog piece on this, but the sentence itself is ambiguous! Does it mean you CAN join a picket line on your lunch hour, or you CAN’T?

Grammar. But local folks told me they are banning people from picketing at lunch.

🫡 @andreaharrington@mastodon.social @angrycrank

@JohnSandlos @TheLawofWork

Reply on Twitter 1621293270956392452 Retweet on Twitter 1621293270956392452 Like on Twitter 1621293270956392452 1 Twitter 1621293270956392452
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
2h

Put together a quick blog post on a subject we've been discussing on Twitter.

"Is Memorial University Illegally Preventing Workers from Joining Picket Lines?"

What do you think?

https://lawofwork.ca/memorialpicketing/

#MemorialStrike #LabourLaw #FreedomofAssociation #CanLab

Reply on Twitter 1621277482719629312 Retweet on Twitter 1621277482719629312 2 Like on Twitter 1621277482719629312 2 Twitter 1621277482719629312
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
6h

STOP MAKING SENSE!

Anthony Francis Dale @anthonyfdale

@TheLawofWork @MemorialU If there is a right to support other employees during non-working time, starting point must be the irrelevance of the fact that lunch is "paid". As Ontario Board said in 1982 Adams Mine case, employer otherwise could prevent exercise of a right by paying money.

Reply on Twitter 1621220629344133120 Retweet on Twitter 1621220629344133120 Like on Twitter 1621220629344133120 3 Twitter 1621220629344133120
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.