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

Should Governments Forbid NHL Lockout?

by David Doorey September 12, 2012
written by David Doorey September 12, 2012

Here’s a good queston to get labour relations law students thinking about government labour policy.  A tweet today from a Toronto Star reporter said this:

“Ontario NDP MPP Paul Miller says McGuinty can stop #NHL from locking out Leafs, Senators players but refuses to do so”

Should Governments Ban an NHL Lockout?


It would be a bit odd to hear an NDP politician asking for government intervention in a labour dispute, since that undermines the position the party usually takes, which is that these disputes should be left to collective bargaining, and that strikes and lockouts are a small but necessary cost we pay for a democracy.  Apparently though Miller’s point was that the Ontario government could and should have been more active in offerning and providing mediation/conciliation services to help avoid a lockout.  Fair enough.
Nevertheless, the NDP politician is correct.  The American and Canadian governments could ban an NHL lockout. And he raises a good point.  On what basis do our politicians decide whether to prohibit work stoppages?  A lockout of the Leafs will harm not just wealthy players and owners.  There are economic spin off effects in restaurants, arena jobs, taxis, hotels, bars, vendors.   Since North American governments seem quite content to ban work stoppages these days, why not intervene in this dispute between millionaires that adversely effects “the little guy”?
The McGuinty government has been very active in repressing work stoppages since being in power.   Think teachers, think teaching assistants, think TTC, think garbage collectors, etc.  At the Federal level, we’ve see the Harper government prohibit strikes and lockouts even in the private sector:  think Air Canada, think CP Rail.  In fact, Canadian governments are punch drunk with using law to prohibit work stoppages, more so than almost any other advanced economic, democratic country.  So much so that the International Labour Organization has singled out Canada for concern for its cavaliar disrespect for collective bargaining.
Then again, sometimes our governments are quite happy to sit back and do nothing.  Ontario allowed work stoppages at Stelco in Hamilton (lockout) and Vale Inco in Sudbury (strike), to drag on for months with no intervention.  These work stoppages had devasting impact on the workers and their families, and did real harm to the local economies as well.  Yet no government intervention.  When Caterpillar locked out and then fired all of its workers near London last year, the McGuinty  government again did nothing. Work stoppages by any Toronto transit worker is now illegal, thanks to the McGuinty Liberals, but when transit workers in Vaughan struck for weeks, the Ontario government again did nothing.

So what is it that determines whether a Canadian government intervenes to prevent a lockout or strike?  What reasoning drives the decisions?

Is it whether the work stoppage impacts other businesses or people?  Almost every work stoppage does that, though some more than others.  Is it about economic impact? The work stoppages at Stelco, Inco, and Vaughan transit created great inconvenience and cost to those communities. On the other hand,  a work stoppage at Air Canada would be dispruptive, but there are also large numbers of competitors that would have been happy to pick up the slack.   A teachers work stoppage is disruptive, yet teachers strike all over the world (there’s a teachers strike on now in Chicago, where I’m heading tomorrow), and life goes on. 

So put on your Minister of Labour hat.  What common thread can explain the recent decisions to intervene or not intervene in work stoppages in Canada?
Applying the rationale you come up with, should governments intervene to prohibit a lockout of NHL players?

3 comments
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
New Work Life Comic: Dismissal Without a Cause
next post
Teachers Boycott Volunteer Work: The Legal Issues

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
RSandillRicha Sandill@RSandill·
21h

@SCLSclinic and I were so fortunate to represent this client last year. I am thrilled that this decision brings more clarity for family status accommodations rights amidst a pandemic that has tested parents, caregivers, and families like never before. https://twitter.com/CanLawWorkForum/status/1364605259071561730

CLWF@CanLawWorkForum

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364627677785821185Retweet on Twitter 13646276777858211851Like on Twitter 13646276777858211853Twitter 1364627677785821185
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey@TheLawofWork·
21h

Here's my latest in @jacobinmag.

If Ontario's labor laws applied in Alabama, the Amazon vote would have been held months ago so workers could get back to their jobs. Instead, the NLRA permits Amazon to conduct a months' long onslaught of anti-union propaganda. https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1364613560425275392

Jacobin@jacobinmag

Amazon workers in Alabama are voting on whether to unionize, but the company is bombarding them with anti-union propaganda. In Canada, by contrast, votes are held quickly, making it harder for companies to stack the deck — a model that can work in the US. http://jacobinmag.com/2021/02/amazon-alabama-canada-labor-law-union-vote

Reply on Twitter 1364623976174092316Retweet on Twitter 13646239761740923168Like on Twitter 136462397617409231613Twitter 1364623976174092316
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
22h

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364605259071561730Retweet on Twitter 13646052590715617304Like on Twitter 13646052590715617304Twitter 1364605259071561730
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.