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

The Possible Strike at York

by David Doorey October 28, 2008
written by David Doorey October 28, 2008

October 28 2008

We noted last week that the collective bargaining between York and CUPE 3903, which represents contract faculty and TAs, could result in a strike/lockout anytime after the deadline of Nov. 2, and that University intends to cancel most classes if that occur.   I have received a lot of comments and emails about this, many of which show a misunderstanding of the law.  So here is a quick primer:

  • Nov. 2nd represents the legal strike/lockout date.  That date is determined by a timeline set out in the Ontario Labour Relations Act. Most of the requirements are found in Section 79.  It follows a series of mandatory steps the parties must take during collective bargaining.  For example, they must have engaged in bargaining ‘in good faith’ and met with a government-appointed conciliator (like a mediator), who was unable to help the parties reach a settlement.  The union must also have held a ‘strike vote’, with a majority of the employees voting to strike.  Once the conciliator informs the Minister of Labour that no deal was reached, the Minister will have issued a letter that says he will not require further conciliation (a ‘no board’ report). Some 14 days after the ‘no board’ report, the parties are in a legal strike or lockout position. That is the Nov. 2nd date.
  • The Nov. 2nd date does not mean the parties must strike or lockout.  It just means it is legal for them to do so at anytime after that date.  There is no legal requirement in the legislation for either side to give ‘notice’ of the beginning of the strike or a lockout.  Apparently, the Union announced it would give 72 hours notice of the beginning of a strike, but I assume that is just a courtesy.  If they don’t give that notice, there will be no legal implication (unless the promise to give notice is in some sort of contract with the Employer, but that would be unusual)
  • Both parties could agree to send the bargaining dispute to binding interest arbitration rather than strike/lockout.  That right is found in section 40 of the OLRA.   But that doesn’t happen all that often.  One reason is that the employer may be better off dealing with a short strike than immediately sending the dispute to arbitration.  Interest arbitration (that’s what it is called when an arbitrator imposes a collective agreement) can often result in a better agreement for the workers than the workers would have been able to win by striking.  Plus the employer experiences cost-savings during a strike, since it doesn’t need to pay wages.  Those savings can then be used to fund some of the agreement that results after the strike.
  • These issues are part of the reason why the TTC recently argued against making it an ‘essential service’:  if the TTC were an essential service, it would mean bargaining disputes would go to interest arbitration (rather than be dealt with in a strike), and the TTC anticipates that will lead to larger settlements.
  • There is no requirement in the legislation for the University to cancel all classes.  An employer in Ontario can continue to operate during a strike.  The decision to cancel classes is a decision of York’s Senate.
  • If a strike/lockout occurs, and it last sufficiently long that the term becomes threatened, then we will no doubt begin to hear rumblings at Queens Park for ‘back to work’ legislation.  This is a new law passed by the government that effectively orders the workers back to work, and usually imposes ‘interest arbitration’ as the way that a new collective agreement will be completed.
  • ‘Back to work’ legislation is controversial because it is a violation of Canada’s obligations under the International Labour Organization’s Convention 87, which Canada has ratified.   Therefore, if the Liberal government orders the York employees back to work, it will likely also then face a ILO complaint, and a rebuke by the ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association.  The ILO does not have the ability to formally punish Ontario, but it is an embarrassment for Canada that it’s governments keep violating international human rights laws by limiting the right to strike through back to work legislation.  (See this report for a summary of cases in which Canadian governments have violated ILO Conventions)    It undermines Canada’s ability to speak with credibility to other countries about the need to respect human rights.
  • If the parties actually do bargain a new collective agreement, that agreement will need to be ratified by a majority in a ratification vote.  That’s in Section 44.  In other words, even if the union’s bargaining team thinks they have bargained an acceptable deal, the employees can still vote it down.  This is what happened during the recent VIVA strike.  In that case, the strike/lockout will continue.

That’s the scenario from a legal perspective.  So, we wait and see what happens …

1 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
Guest Blog: Fang on Immigrant Workers in Canada
next post
York Strike Update

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

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 ·
38m

There’s many measures in academia that rank influence based on number of citations of academic articles.

Advice to new scholars:

If these rankings matter to you, do NOT focus your publications on Canadian labour & employment law. The potential audience is WAY too small!

Reply on Twitter 1623062714028290049 Retweet on Twitter 1623062714028290049 Like on Twitter 1623062714028290049 Twitter 1623062714028290049
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
5h

I use Steve Martin’s template for making a personal connection with his fans to make a personal connection with my students.

Reply on Twitter 1622997711287885824 Retweet on Twitter 1622997711287885824 5 Like on Twitter 1622997711287885824 50 Twitter 1622997711287885824
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
5h

Some numbers from Stats Can:

- Union density⬇️from 38% in 1981 to 29% in 2022.

- Over same period, % of men in unions⬇️ by 16%, but remained stable for women.

- Result: women (31%) more likely to be unionized in Canada than men (26%)

🧵 /1

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/36-28-0001/2022011/article/00001-eng.htm

Reply on Twitter 1622996016281657347 Retweet on Twitter 1622996016281657347 12 Like on Twitter 1622996016281657347 24 Twitter 1622996016281657347
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.