Back to work legislation |
The federal government’s recent use of Section 107 of the Canadian Labour Code to end the recent Air Canada flight attendant strike was a troubling development for Canadian workers and unions.
On Aug. 16, less than 12 hours after more than 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants walked off the job, the federal jobs minister intervened.
Patty Hajdu invoked Section 107 to order the attendants back to work, and directed their union and Air Canada to binding arbitration — a process in which a neutral third party decides on the terms of a collective agreement after considering each party’s position.
Section 107 provides the jobs minister with the general power to “maintain or secure industrial peace” and to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB), which adjudicates workplace disputes, to also take similar actions.
Since June 2024, the federal government has used Section 107 four other times to interfere with striking workers at West Jet, the CN and CPKC railways, the British Columbia and Québec ports and Canada Post.
The ability to strike is the most powerful tool workers have when collectively bargaining with their employers. When the government intervenes and pre-emptively ends a strike, it undermines the legal purpose and use of strikes in Canadian labour law. It also likely violates workers’ constitutional right to strike under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The purpose of strikes in Canadian labour law
In defending its use of Section 107, the federal government has repeatedly argued its intervention is necessary because the parties were at an impasse. This undermines the very purpose of a strike.
Under Canadian labour law, workers can only strike during........