Class Notes (786,419)
Canada (482,179)
JS380 (30)

Alteration of Working Conditions The Statutory Freeze.docx
Alteration of Working Conditions The Statutory Freeze.docx

4 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Regina
Justice Studies
Stefan Idziak

Alteration of Working Conditions: The Statutory Freeze  no unlitaral changes to the wokring conditinos during the certication and bargaining processes.  PRe-certification freeze begins when certificate is filed, and ends when application dismissed or certificate issued.  then bargaining freeze kicks in and substists until there is a legal strike/lockout position.  Point is to avoid employers from undermining union o this means even bona fide business decisions may be illegal during the freeze period. o even doing things that are in the favour of workers may lead to an unfair business practice  don't want bribes or punishments.  Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce o during freeze period, Bank gave raise to all non-organizing branches but not branch that was organizing. o Board applied "busniess as before" test and found an unfair business practice. o shcheduled pay raises must continue as before  BC allows some changes in conditions o employer can apply to board to have conditions of employment changed, even during the freeze o board may allow these changes if "business as usual" and "business as before"  perhaps based on resaonable expectations of parties? Simpsons Limited v. Canadian Union of Brewery, Flour... (1985) N.S. LRBR  Employer department store, in some difficulty.  union recently certified. Just prior to notice to bargain, employer made big lay offs across the workforce, including in certified unit. o some of the work that was laid off was replaced by contractors.  Board accepted that the layoffs were done without anti-union animus.  But bargaining freeze meant "business as before" was supposed to keep going o this is a hard test though.  Typcially first time events are rejected by the board o however, sometimes layoffs are ok during the freeze, even where that was the first instance of lay offs.  Goes to reasonable expectations model instead o what would a reasonable employee expect to constitute his or her privileges in the specific circumstances of that employer? o it may be reasonable for employees to expect an employer to respond to a sginficant downturn in buseiness with layoffs, even if this is the first round of layoffs. o of course, severity and extent of layoffs must be proportionate to the severity of the economic circumstances. o Must be an absence of animus.  So layoffs ok  but would a reasonable employee expect a downturn to be met with layoffs, then have those layoffs replaced with contract workers? o during the freeze, the employers abliity to contract out is limited.  Ultimately the board found that the lay offs were ok, but that the contracting out was not, because "the introduction of a new means to continue to have the work performed" aws outside the employees' reasonable expectations? Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Royal Ottawa Care Group  Hospital reduced benefits during bargaining freeze.  hospital says it was acting in response to serious budgetary pressures. o reducing savings without impairing other benefits or patient care. Analysis  freeze captures bonafide actions that may nonetheless undermine organization.  aim is to facilitate bargaining, not protect employees from persecution  "business as usual" model is flawed, since obviously when unionization occurs, the business must change. o indeed, if business continue to act unilaterally as it did before, it would violate the process.  reasonable expectation not much help, since no easy way to determine how reasonable employee expectations may be ascertained. o besides, given the organizing employees should reasonably expect that these kinds of decisions will be the product of bargaining.  Board moves to a third approach, that reads the freeze provisions in light of the need to bolster the bargaining process, reinforce the status of the unioin as bargaining agent, and provide a firm (if temporary) starting point for the collective bargain National Labor Relations Board v. Exchange Parts Co., (1964), USA USA USA  basically boils down to changes that benefit the employees are also not allowed.  "Danger of a fist inside the velvet glove".  employees will assume that what can be given can be taken away... Ratio:  new benefits are also inappropriate during the statutory freeze. Unionization and Wal-Mart in Canada Plourde v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. [2009] SCC Facts  D closed its store during negotiations with union over a first collective geement  P argued that when Wal-Mart closed the store and he lost his job, this should be understood as dismisal motivated by anti-union animus  trbinual and lower courts said that Wal-Mart had permanently closed the store, so it doesn't matter what the motivations were o can't order reinstatement, and can't order Wal-Mart to reopen the store  SCC rule 6:3 in favour of Wal_mart o Binnie said that 15-17, which deal with dismissal for union activity, could not apply where the employer had p
More Less

Related notes for JS380

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.