Canadian bill would fine workers $4,000 for each day of strike | Canada

The prime minister of CanadaCanada’s most populous province is under fire for a ‘draconian’ bill that would fine school support staff C$4,000 (US$2,900) a day for striking, sparking fears that Ontario erodes basic workers’ rights – and sets a troubling precedent.

Doug Ford’s Conservative government tabled a bill this week that would unilaterally contract education workers and impose heavy fines for strikes. The move escalates a bitter dispute over pay for education workers, including caretakers, early childhood educators and educational assistants.

Justin Trudeau waded into a deadlock, with the prime minister sharply criticizing the Ontario government’s decision to “suspend people’s rights and freedoms.”

The Canadian Union of Public Employees, which represents 55,000 education workers, has demanded an 11.3% raise for its workers – often the lowest paid in schools – arguing that stagnating wage growth and high inflation hit the lowest earners the hardest.

The government responded with an annual increase of 2.5% for the lowest income workers and 1.5% for the rest.

With little progress in negotiations and a strike scheduled for Friday, the government has fast-tracked Bill 28.

If passed, the controversial legislation – which fines workers C$4,000 a day and C$500,000 the union in the event of a strike – would mark the first time in the county’s history that workers’ rights to bargain collectively and strike could be legally abolished.

The government acknowledges that its bill violates the country’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code, but says its priority is to avoid a strike.

The Ontario government invokes a rarely used legal mechanism known as the notwithstanding clause, which allows provincial governments to opt out of parts of the charter for a period of five years.

Quebec has long used the clause to adopt its language rights lawsbut most governments have been reluctant to use the mechanism, constitutional lawyer Ewa Krajewska said.

“The Ford government was much quicker to get the clause and the concern from a constitutional rights perspective is that it’s becoming more and more normal to invoke it,” she said. “And I’m afraid that every time there’s a bit of a blowout about rights and legislation, the government is just going to invoke the notwithstanding clause. The fact that they are ready to go so quickly should give everyone pause.

Canada’s justice minister has called it “extremely problematic”, but Krajewska says there is little the federal government can do to stop it.

Lawyers also say they are troubled by the government’s pre-emptive use of the clause that would protect Bill 28 from judicial review.

“The Ford government is basically saying they’re above the law. This is not just an attack on the fundamental rights of the Charter, the human rights and the labor rights of education workers. It is also an attack on our constitutional democracy and the rule of law,” said Adrienne Telford, a lawyer specializing in constitutional and labor law.

Canada’s highest court recognized workers’ right to strike in 2015. In cases where employees are deemed essential, the right to strike is replaced by arbitration.

Telford said Ontario’s attempt to unilaterally impose a contract and working conditions was even more concerning.

“Workers were not even allowed to exercise their right to strike. It’s preemptive. But what is even more shocking is that the government is not replacing their basic right to strike with the right to arbitrate,” she said. “Basically, this is an attempt by the government to avoid having to appear before an independent arbiter and not get what they want.

Ford has long presented itself as a champion of the working classbut the row prompted a union that had previously backed him to ask the prime minister to back down.

Earlier this week, a branch of Labourers’ International Union North America, Canada’s largest construction union, lobbied the province’s education minister to restore collective bargaining rights.

The Ontario Bar Association also condemned the decision, calling the uncertainty surrounding fundamental rights “potentially destabilizing” and raising concerns that the short-term gains achieved by the Ford government will come at a cost to society. “who might not be recognized until it is too late”.

“In theory, governments could just include the notwithstanding clause in every piece of legislation they have,” Telford said. “What is the point of fundamental rights and freedoms if they can simply be pre-emptive and ignored – and protected from scrutiny by a court?”