Canadian Union of Postal Workers v. Canada

Firms involved

Cavalluzzo LLP, Justice Canada, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
CANADIAN UNION OF POSTAL WORKERS/SYNDICAT DES TRAVAILLEURS ET TRAVAILLEUSES DES POSTES
Law Firm
Cavalluzzo LLP
Lawyer(s)

Paul Cavalluzzo

Adrienne Telford

Balraj Dosanjh

JAN SIMPSON
Law Firm
Cavalluzzo LLP
Lawyer(s)

Paul Cavalluzzo

Adrienne Telford

Balraj Dosanjh

MYRON MAY
Law Firm
Cavalluzzo LLP
Lawyer(s)

Paul Cavalluzzo

Adrienne Telford

Balraj Dosanjh

SOPHIE GRENIER
Law Firm
Cavalluzzo LLP
Lawyer(s)

Paul Cavalluzzo

Adrienne Telford

Balraj Dosanjh

HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Law Firm
Justice Canada
Lawyer(s)

Kathryn Hucal

Jon Bricker

Matilyn Venney

Monisha Ambwami

CANADA POST CORPORATION
Law Firm
Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
Lawyer(s)

Christopher Pigott

Rachel Counsell

The case Canadian Union of Postal Workers v. Canada involves a constitutional challenge by the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) against the Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act (PSRCA). Enacted in 2018, the PSRCA ended rotating strikes by postal workers and imposed a new collective bargaining process.

Key Points:

  1. Mootness:
    • The court found the case moot because the PSRCA had already achieved its purpose and was no longer in force. The collective bargaining process that followed concluded with a new agreement, later replaced by a freely negotiated one.
  2. Charter Challenge:
    • CUPW argued the PSRCA violated their members' freedom of association under section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by infringing on their right to strike and imposing arbitration.
    • The court acknowledged that the PSRCA did infringe on the right to strike but found the infringement justifiable under section 1 of the Charter, given the minimal impairment of rights and the fairness of the arbitration process.
  3. Costs:
    • CUPW settled costs with the Attorney General but contested the nearly $500,000 sought by Canada Post Corporation (CPC) as an intervenor. The court reduced CPC's award to $150,000, criticizing the high request.
  4. Outcome:
    • The application was dismissed due to mootness. The court noted that even if the case weren’t moot, the PSRCA would likely have been upheld as constitutionally justified.

 

Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
CV-18-00610573-0000
Labour & Employment Law
$ 150,000
Respondent