Digests

Labour Relations

Judicial review of decision by Minister of Labour (Minister) delegate granting respondent’s request for appointment of conciliation officer pursuant to Canada Labour Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. L-2, s. 72—Respondent serving notice to applicant of desire to enter into collective bargaining—Applicant contending such notice premature, improper—Respondent later filing for protection under Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36—As a result, Ontario Superior Court issuing order staying proceedings against respondent—Minister granting respondent’s request made pursuant to Code, s. 71 to appoint conciliation officer pursuant to Code, s. 72 to address dispute between respondent, applicant—Whether appointment of conciliation officer (1) prohibited by stay order, (2) invalid because made in relation to non-existent disputes, (3) improper because unreasonable exercise of Minister’s discretion or because of absence of duty to bargain, service of proper notice—Issue 1: Standard stay order preventing other entities from exercising rights, remedies against company in question (i.e. respondent) but not preventing company from taking action on own behalf except in respect of company under Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3 or Winding-up and Restructuring Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. W-11—Appointment of conciliator not proceeding against respondent or in respect of Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act or Winding-up and Restructuring Act—CCAA not prohibiting respondent from giving notice of dispute under Code, s. 71, Minister from appointing conciliator under Code, s. 72—Issue 2: Minister’s decision awkwardly written, referring to disputes involving six separate entities—However, such reference not meaning Minister erroneously unaware original entities now one bargaining unit—Unlikely Minister misapprehending nature, form of dispute at time of decision—Issue 3: Applicant refusing to bargain when obligated to do so—Thus exercise of discretion by Minister no ground for rendering decision unreasonable—S. 71 wording clear that notice to commence collective bargaining to be “given under this Part”, i.e. under Code, ss. 18(4)(f), 48, 49—Those provisions not applicable herein—Respondent deliberately ignoring words “given under this Part”, simply asserting that serving notice to commence collective bargaining sufficient to satisfy s. 71 preconditions for giving notice to bargain—Minister thus erring in concluding, accepting respondent’s argument that all s. 71 prerequisites met—Application allowed.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers’ Union of Canada v. Global Television (T-418-10, 2010 FC 988, Russell J., judgment dated October 5, 2010, 43 pp.)