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

Steelworkers Apply for Certification at Magna

by David Doorey August 31, 2008
written by David Doorey August 31, 2008

So, the inevitable has now happened.  Another union–the United Steelworkers–has tried to organize a Magna operation.
Recall that Magna entered into a much-hyped preferential organizing agreement with the CAW last year the parties called the “framework of fairness”.  That agreement confered on the CAW a variety of organizing aids, including employee lists, access to the workplace for the purpose of organizing, a union ‘captive audience meeting’, and the verbal support of the employer.  The USWA has not requested equal treatment to that given the CAW, presumably because their strategy has involved emphasizing that they have not entered into the sort of cozy arrangement described in the Framework of Fairness.  I have no idea if the Steelworkers have attained the necessary 40 percent support to obtain a ballot, but regardless, a vote will be held this coming week (because the Board holds the vote, and sorts out afterwards whether there was a legal right to the vote).
I have noted before that the Magna-CAW arrangement sits uneasily with Canadian labour laws that prevent employers from providing ‘any support’ to a union trying to organize their employees, and that prohibit employers from interfering or participating in the ‘selection’ of a union by the employees (see s. 15 and s. 70 of the OLRA).
The issue is whether Magna can give preferential organizing rights to the CAW and not, say, the United Steelworkers.  Reading the Act literally, it’s hard to imagine how Magna is not giving “other support” to the CAW if, for example, it refused a Steelworker request for the same access rights to its employees it gives the CAW.  It will be tempting for Magna during the next few days prior to the vote to tell employees that they would be better off supporting the CAW and the Framework of Fairness model, and that supporting the USWA would be a mistake.   Would this then amount to unlawful interference in the ‘selection’ of a union?
I think it could.  In a case involving Coca-Cola, the OLRB ruled that the employer had not provided unlawful support to the CAW by permitting employees who supported the CAW to organize during working hours, while the same possibility was not afforded rival UFWC organizers.
Here’s what the Board said about s. 15 and s. 70:

The Board may not certify a union when it has received employer financial or “other” support.  There is no allegation of financial support of the CAW-Canada by the employer.  The allegation is that the employer gave the CAW-Canada “other support”, such as is proscribed in s. 70 and s. 15 of the Act.  [The UFCW] says that permitting access to CAW-Canada supporters to the staff canteen and other areas … was the “other support”.
32. In some contexts, these facts could lead to the conclusion that, prima facie, an employer has provided other support to a union in its organizing campaign.  However, the context in which the events occurs is important.  In this case, the main allegations by the [UFCW] are that employees were allowed to circulate in the workplace undeterred, expressing their preference for the CAW-Canada, and having employees sign cards in support. The employer is not accused of having its managers, or supervisors, or any person associated with it, participate in, or encourage, the CAW-Canada’s organizing drive.  The contest for employee support was between two very sophisticated, large unions, whose independence from employers is unquestionable.

In that case, the OLBR ruled that ‘other support’ had not been provided the CAW.  But it might be different if the employer expressly encourages employees to reject one union because it has already entered into a cozy relationship with another.  Let’s watch how Magna manages this situation.  Stay tuned.

0 comment
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
Toyota's No Layoff Policy
next post
Guest Blog: Barnacle on Saskatchewan's Labour Law Reforms and the Legal Challenges Against Them

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·
24 Feb

@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·
24 Feb

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·
24 Feb

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.