OTTAWA – Canada Post workers are taking the Harper government to court in a case that could test the Conservatives’ aggressive stance on the rights of unionized labour.
The Canadian Union of Postal Workers is challenging the constitutionality of the law which forced its members back to work in June.
Close to 50,000 Canada Post workers were locked out by the Crown corporation in June after 12 days of rotating strikes by the union.
The majority Conservatives had cited the fragile economy when they decided to go ahead with a back-to-work bill, a move they’ve repeated in other labour disputes since.
But the union says such laws take away workers’ rights.
“This back-to-work legislation was unjust,” union president Denis Lemelin told a news conference Wednesday. “It was the democratic rights of workers that were attacked.
“There is a fundamental principle here – the freedom of association.”
The union has already challenged several elements of the legislation, including the selection of the arbitrator. It says the judge chosen by Labour Minister Lisa Raitt has no expertise in labour relations and also doesn’t speak French.
A spokeswoman for Raitt said the government was acting to protect the public interest by legislating the workers back to their jobs.
Get weekly money news
“There was evidence that it was causing serious harm to small businesses across the country,” Jana Regimbal said in an email.
She did not comment directly on the lawsuit.
At the same time as the postal workers news conference, Air Canada’s flight attendants announced they’re moving to strike just after midnight, despite efforts by Raitt to prevent the action.
Constitutional lawyer Paul Cavalluzzo, hired to represent the postal union, says the Conservative government has become “addicted” to back-to-work laws.
“It’s an important case because we see now we have a federal government that is very cavalier with the fundamental freedoms of workers today,” he said.
One element of the case hinges on asking the court to determine whether the Charter protects the right to strike, he added.
Cavalluzzo said he expects the case eventually will be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
“It’s not just the postal workers whose rights have been attacked, it’s the CAW in their context, it’s the CUPE and the flight attendant situation…,” he said.
- Alberta government expects $100 payouts to arrive within 2 weeks of applications
- Alberta giving $100 energy rebates to some households — is yours one of them?
- SpaceX rockets past Amazon to become world’s 5th most valuable company
- Benefit payments are coming soon to those who qualify. Here’s how much
“If workers rights are going to be trampled on so cavalierly, then I think workers have to stand up and the only avenue left for them is to fight for their constitutional rights in the courts.”
Raitt said Tuesday she was sending the Air Canada matter to the Canada Industrial Relations Board for review and that no strike or lockout is permitted while the independent agency is studying the matter.
Members of Parliament – enjoying a week-long Thanksgiving break – could have been recalled to pass any back-to-work legislation for the flight attendants, but House of Commons rules would have prevented any law from being passed until after the start of the threatened strike.
But the Canadian Union of Public Employees, which represents 6,800 flight attendants, said it is in a legal strike position.
Other Air Canada employees who sought strike action earlier this year also faced a back-to-work bill. However they reached an agreement with the airline before it became law.
The bill that forced Canada Post employees back to work also marked former NDP Leader Jack Layton’s legislative last stand.
Layton led his party through a 58-hour filibuster in the House of Commons designed to stall passage of the law in order to give both sides more time to talk.
A month later, faced with a new cancer diagnosis, he stepped down as leader and died in August.
Note to readers: A previous story said 5,000 workers were locked out. In fact, it was closer to 50,000.
Comments
Want to discuss? Please read our Commenting Policy first.