In a decision rendered on January 25, 2016, adjudicator Linda Gobeil of the Public Service Labour Relations Board concluded that the Parole Board of Canada failed to accommodate a grievor suffering from “emotional stress” in a manner consistent with the requirements of Canadian Human Rights Act.

The adjudicator found that the emotional stress suffered by the employee as a result of her proximity to a particular co-worker amounted to a disability that triggered the employer’s duty to provide reasonable accommodation. The employer was ordered to find workspace for the grievor in another building and to compensate her for lost wages and benefits during the relevant time frame.

The grievor was represented by Kim Patenaude of RavenLaw, who told the Ottawa Citizen that the Adjudicator’s decision “has the potential to broaden an employer’s responsibility to provide accommodation” and is a win for employees with disabilities, especially those with mental health concerns.  For more information, click here.

Our office hours during the holidays are as follows:

December 24 – closed at noon

December 25-28 – closed

December 29-30 – opened

December 31 – closed at noon

January 1 – closed 

Thank you and Happy Holidays.

March 8^th is International Women’s Day, a day that marks the social, economic, cultural and political achievements of women. Not just a celebration, International Women’s Day is a call to action for all the work that remains to be done. At a time when recent reports reveal that Canadian women earn only 72% of men’s wages for similar work, it is important to reflect on the labour roots of International Women’s Day and the struggles that remain for working women in Canada and around the world.

History of International Women’s Day

The origins of International Women’s Day can be traced back to the early 1900s. At that time, work was increasingly industrialized, leading to dangerous and unfair working conditions. In response, women began organizing to demand better working conditions, including shorter working hours and better pay. In 1908, 15,000 female garment workers marched through New York City to call for these improvements. This march would inspire the International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union to stage a strike to protest working conditions in the city’s sweatshops. Although this initial strike was short-lived, it led to a General Strike, which lasted for three months and brought important gains for many workers.

In 1909, the Socialist Party of America, a social-democratic political party in the United States, designated February 28 as National Women’s Day in honour of the garment workers’ strike.

At the same time, European women were struggling to achieve greater fairness and protections in the workplace. In 1910, a second International Conference of Working Women was held in Copenhagen, with over 100 women from 17 countries in attendance, including union leaders and the first 3 women elected to the Finnish Parliament. At this Conference, Clara Zetkin, leader of the Women’s Office of the German Social Democratic Party, tabled a proposal for an annual woman’s day – a day for women to collectively raise their demands for better working conditions, suffrage and political representation. The proposal was unanimously approved.

As a result of Zetkin’s efforts, the first International Women’s Day was observed on March 19, 1911 in Austria, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland. More than one million women and men attended rallies to mark the day, raising awareness of issues of women’s rights to work, to vocational training and discrimination in the workplace, as well as the right to vote and hold political office. Sadly, only a week after the first International Women’s Day, a deadly fire at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York City killed more than 140 working women. This tragedy brought greater attention to the issues of workplace conditions that the garment workers had protested in 1908.

International Women’s Day became increasingly prominent in Europe and became a vehicle for the peace movement during World War I. Protesting the war, Russian women observed the day for the first time in 1913. In 1914, women around Europe held solidarity rallies on March 8. In 1917, Russian women selected March 8 as a day of protest and held a strike for “Bread and Peace”. The women continued to strike for 4 days and were joined by other protests and strikes, contributing to the forced abdication of Czar Nicholas II. The Provisional Government then granted Russian women the right to vote. March 8 was later declared a national Soviet holiday by Lenin.

In 1975, International Women’s Year, the United Nations officially sanctioned International Women’s Day and began celebrating International Women’s Day on March 8 of every year. International Women’s Day is now an official holiday in many countries around the world.

International Women’s Day – Today and in the Future

Nowadays, International Women’s Day is a day for celebrating the achievements of women. The history of International Women’s Day reminds us that these achievements include the role of women in advancing the rights of workers around the world. Women have played a significant role in the labour movement, and the radical action of working women has led to important social change.

March 8^th is also a day to reflect on the work yet to be done. In the workplace alone, issues of pay inequity, the disproportionate burden of childcare, gender-based job discrimination, and sexual harassment continue to impact Canadian women. Globally, women face significant inequalities in all areas of their lives. For example, harkening back to the roots of International Women’s Day in the activism of New York’s garment workers in 1908, the day was marked in Bangladesh this year by garment workers protesting for safe working conditions, equal pay and an end to violence against women.

All workers, women and men, in Canada and abroad, should use this day to reflect on the ways in which women’s rights and workers’ rights intersect, and how both movements can work in concert to advance the cause of equality.

[This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, which cannot be given without consideration of your individual circumstances.]

The Federal Court of Appeal recently upheld the Canada Industrial Relations Board’s decision to order binding resolution of a disputed issue in first contract negotiations between the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) and the Listuguj Mi’gmaq First Nations Council (the employer) as a remedy for the employer’s breach of the duty to bargain in good faith.

Paragraph 50(a) of the Canada Labour Code requires the parties to negotiate in good faith and make every reasonable effort to enter into a collective agreement. The Board concluded the employer violated that duty by failing to communicate its reasons to PSAC for refusing to ratify a tentative agreement until after the Board initiated unfair labour practice proceedings. During the Board’s hearing, the employer revealed its intent to renegotiate the tentative agreement’s employment equity provisions to give it the authority to terminate a bargaining unit member when a qualified First Nations member was available for the position. The tentative agreement already provided a preference for qualified First Nations members in employment, a principle supported by PSAC. But as the Federal Court of Appeal emphasized, the employer’s new demand was “highly unusual” and “one that would be difficult for any trade union to ever agree to.”

The Board crafted a detailed remedy including an order that, if the parties were unable to reach agreement on the issue of preferential hiring within a 60-day period, it would order a binding method of resolving that particular term of their agreement. In its application for judicial review, the employer argued that the Board’s order was unreasonable because, among other things, it bore no rational connection to its breach of the Code and interfered with free collective bargaining. In rejecting those arguments, the Federal Court of Appeal found that the order was tied to the employer’s breaches of the Code found by the Board. What’s more, “given the prospect of binding arbitration failing agreement, the remedial order issued by the Board may well have facilitated compromise and thus furthered the process of collective bargaining.”

Read the full text of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision here. The Board’s decision is available here.

The Public Service Alliance of Canada was represented by Andrew Raven and Michael Fisher of RavenLaw.

Please note that our office will be closed on Friday, March 25, 2016 and Monday, March 28, 2016 in recognition of the Easter holiday.

As a member of a CSA Group Working Group, David Yazbeck contributed to the development of the Whistleblowing Guideline, which will be available for purchase on the CSA Group website on January 12, 2016. The Guideline sets out best practices for whistleblowing arrangements within an organization. This is aimed at the public and private sectors, as well as NGOs and voluntary organizations.

David Yazbeck is one of the leading practitioners in the area of whistleblower law. He was one of many experts or interested persons who were appointed to the CSA Group working group to establish the Whistleblowing Guideline.

The partners of Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck are pleased to announce the selection of the successful 2016 Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck Human Rights/Social Justice Internship candidates, Max Halparin and Samantha Dubord. Both Max and Samantha are in the second year of their studies at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. We congratulate Max and Samantha on their achievement and look forward to working with them this summer when the internship takes place.

This is the eleventh consecutive year that our firm has offered this Human Rights/Social Justice internship. Every summer, we provide paid employment to a student from the University of Ottawa Law School with placements in our firm and two social justice or human rights organizations. This year, Samantha and Max will be working with the National Educational Association of Disabled Students and a joint venture with the Canadian Council for Refugees, South Ottawa Legal Clinic and the University of Ottawa. Previous placements for our internship have included the Workers’ History Museum, International Development Research Centre, EGALE Canada, Amnesty International, the Ottawa Coalition to End Violence Against Women, the Council of Canadians, REACH Canada, and many other organizations which provide significant contributions in the areas of social justice and human rights.

Another year is drawing to a close, providing an opportunity to look back and consider the year’s victories and challenges in the labour and employment law context. 2015 was a momentous year for workers’ rights: there were several significant court judgments, as well as important legislative and political changes. Here is RavenLaw’s Year in Review, listing of the top five developments of the year:

1. Right to strike: the Supreme Court issued its new “Labour Trilogy” this year, with three judgments that elaborated upon freedom of association under the Charter in the labour context. The most significant of these cases was Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan, 2015 SCC 4, which recognized a Constitutional right to strike. Read more about this huge gain for workers’ rights here.
2. Constructive dismissal: in Potter v New Brunswick Legal Aid Services Commission, 2015 SCC 10, the Supreme Court clarified the test for when an employee has been constructively dismissed. The Court emphasized the importance of work, confirming that the withholding an employee’s work can amount to constructive dismissal. Read more about the judgment here.
3. Upheaval in unjust dismissal law under Canada Labour Code: the Federal Court of Appeal’s judgment in Wilson v Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd, 2015 FCA 17 departed from the well-established approach to unjust dismissal complaints under the Canada Labour Code, and rejected that employees under that regime can only be terminated for just cause. The Supreme Court has granted leave to appeal the judgment, and workers’ advocates will be closely watching the results of that appeal. Read more about the Court of Appeal’s judgment here.
4. Expanded worker remedies under the Employment Standards Act: important remedial gains for Ontario workers took effect in February of this year, pursuant to amendments to the Employment Standards Act. These amendments included the elimination of a cap on recovery for unpaid wages and increases to the time limits to bring employment standards complaints. Read more about these developments here.
5. Ousting of the federal Conservatives: while this was not a legal development, there is no question that this change will dramatically impact workers’ rights going forward. The Liberal government has promised to repeal several anti-union laws passed by the Conservatives. Read more about those campaign promises here.

[This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, which cannot be given without consideration of your individual circumstances.]

On March 29, 2016, David Yazbeck will be speaking on “Blowing a Whistle at Work: Legal Rights and Obligations” at the Insight Information Workplace Rights & Accommodations Forum 2016. The Forum will provide a guideline for handling complicated workplace accommodations and rights issues through in-depth analysis into case law and best practices.

David’s presentation will examine whistleblowing, including when an employee can blow the whistle, key elements of a whistleblower policy, when an employee can “go public” and the legislation that exists to facilitate whistleblowing or provide protection in the case of reprisal for whistleblowing.

On January 7, 2016, RavenLaw was proud to support the University of Ottawa Employment & Labour Law Students’ Society in hosting a social event bringing together students interested in labour and employment law and lawyers practicing in the field. Andrew Astritis and Amanda Montague-Reinholdt were pleased to attend on behalf of RavenLaw and have the opportunity to meet students interested in our area of practice.