Saskatchewan board to hear complaint against Wal-Mart Québec closure
November 17, 2008 - 8:23pm
This is weird, especially given the composition of the Saskatchewan board following the purge by the new right-wing government:
The Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board has agreed to hear a union complaint that U.S-based retail giant Wal-Mart breached Saskatchewan labour law when it closed its store in Jonquière, Quebec, which was the first in North America to obtain union certification. The unusual complaint by the United Food and Commercial Workers alleges that the Quebec store closing is an unfair labour practice under Saskatchewan's Trade Union Act because it was intended to intimidate employees not only in the province where it occurred, but also everywhere else where attempts were being made to organize, including at three Wal-Mart stores in Saskatchewan.
This is weird, especially given the composition of the Saskatchewan board following the purge by the new right-wing government:
Well, this decision was actually delivered by the former Chair of the LRB. He and one of the vice-chairs are finishing off decisions that had been heard before them prior to the changing of the guard. So the new Chair and/or Vice Chair had nothing to do with this'un.
Thanks, I missed that - now it makes a lot more sense.
More great news, after another long battle! The best part is that this is another Wal-Mart in the same city (Gatineau) where they shut down the unionized automotive shop earlier this year:
Gatineau Wal-Mart union is certified 3 1/2 years after the original application
Wal-Mart is appealing to Québec Superior Court to demand a secret ballot. Some insight into Wal-Mart's tactics and its propaganda warfare:
But Wal-Mart spokesman Andrew Pelletier said there are no plans for negotiations until the Quebec court rules.
"The union has said that it would support a secret vote but that didn't happen," he said.
He said there are only 63 employees of the original 194 employees still at the store when the union got a majority to sign union cards in 2005.
Pelletier said public polls show Quebec residents believe union representation should be decided by secret ballot.
Great news, great news, great news!
From the link, I also note:
(1) There is a SCC hearing Jan 7th re: the test for establishing whether a store closure is motivated by anti-union animus.
So in the Gatineau case, the QLRB decided that Wal-Mart could close the store as long as its reasons for doing so were "real, genuine and definitive". In a subsequent case, the Board heard evidence about Wal-Mart's actions after the closure of another store, and established that Wal-Mart had not demolished the store, nor sold the property, or made any significant effort to find a new tenant. Therefore the evidence did not support that the ostensible reasons for the store closure were "real, genuine and definitive". However, the trial court decision, upheld on appeal, reversed the QLRB ruling on a finding that the "real, genuine and definitive reasons" test unreasonably reversed the burden of proof onto the respondent, Wal-Mart.
So this SCC case, one way or the other will be very significant for future organizing efforts.
(2) It appears that the Saskatchewan LRB ruling in UFCW L. 1400 v. Wal-Mart is only an interim decision concerning Wal-Mart's preliminary jurisdicational challenge. Presumably then, the same Hearing Panel will remain seized for the merits. If the new Chair tries to kick them off the case, if that is not the usual practice for that Board, that could be seen as a violation of natural justice that would potentially allow the courts to intervene.
Question: Does anyone happen to know what came of the SFL's hearing, with CUPE and others, in June last year, requesting that the new SLRB Chair's appointment be quashed and the previous Chair and VCs reinstated?
Order-in-Council 98/2008 terminated the Vice-Chairs and Chair of the Labour Relations Board (LRB) and appointed a new Chair on March 6th.
"The government agrees the firings were without cause. You don't have to look too closely at how this was handled to see that the government's actions were designed to promote business interests, rather than to uphold the purpose of the Trade Union Act, which is to promote union rights. We are alleging that the government in effect is telling the Board to violate its own Act ," said Larry Hubich, SFL President.
The unions are arguing that the Order violates the legal administrative principle that quasi-judicial tribunals like the LRB must be free to do their job without government interference and influence.
The unions will also argue that workers' freedom of association under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been violated.
http://www.larryhubich.ca/Unions_take_govt_to_court_over_LRB.pdf
(Sorry, this is a tangent, but I can't figure out how to bump or link to the Mar08 thread, "Chair and Vice-Chair of the Sask Labour Relations Board fired" where this was last discussed.)
Triciamarie, I don't think that last thread is available on the rabble site any more, but luckily it still survives in Google's cache. I can't answer your question about the SFL hearing (or rather, the Court of Queen's Bench application), but if something significant had happened, I'm sure Larry Hubich would have reported it in his blog, no?
Wow, so are all the old threads, even those from last year, just, like, gone for practical purposes?
Anyway. You're probably right. I couldn't find the trial court decision in CanLII though, so I wasn't sure if the SFL withdrew the application, or hopefully -- noting the Charter issue, which could make for a lengthy process -- if it was still ongoing, multiple hearing days etc.
Maybe I'll check in with Larry Hubich on his blog and see if he is able to provide an update.
On a related matter to that though, it was interesting to note that another provincial agency, the Public Service Commission soundly slapped the government for its political purge of about 70 senior public servants, including Allan Walker, the ADM of the Occupational Health and Safety Branch:
In a recent ruling, the Saskatchewan Public Service Commission has overturned the firing of Allan Walker - who was terminated, apparently on the recommendation (instructions) of an unelected, unaccountable Sask. Party operative who was contracted by Premier Brad Wall to hand-pick certain government employees to be fired following the last provincial election.
I posted an entry about this situation on July 10, 2008: Sask. Party gov’t faces questions in Walker wrongful dismissal case
Following the release of the 19 page decision a number of articles have appeared in local newspapers and on-line:
Commission slams civil service firings - CBC Sask. web site
New gov'ts asked to stop firing civil servants - Hall - Leader-Post
It's time for some civil behaviour - Mandryk - Leader-Post
Political purges slammed - Dawg's Blawg
Fired civil servant wins case - Mandryk - StarPhoenix
PSC blasts Sask. Party gov’t over Walker firing; Deputy Premier Ken Krawetz oblivious - Owls and Roosters Blog
One of my favourite quotes from the decision is:
"To arbitrarily end the careers of competent public leaders without cause based on political direction sends a message to the remaining and prospective employees that a public service career is at best a matter of who you know rather than what you know or what you are capable of accomplishing."
August 28, 2008, entry www.larryhubich.blogspot.com
Unbelievable.
All of this relevant to the subject of your thread, Unionist, only insofar as I fear this wingnut Brad Wall's government will not want to have anything to do with with a positive outcome in such a high-profile international labour case, so given their history, they may try to work the levers of government to eliminate that possibility. But, we shall see.
Well, that public service commissioner is gone:
The Saskatchewan Party government has cancelled the appointment of one of the public service commissioners (PSC) that handled the recent Allan Walker wrongful dismissal case and have appointed what appear to be two former Devine Tory staffers as members.
StarPhoenix reporter James Wood said Roberta Burns was nearly four years past the expiration date of her original term, was serving at the pleasure of the government and said her replacement was a matter of routine.
Wayne Elhard, the Sask. Party minister responsible for the PSC, said there was “no retribution” involved in the change, which was done in an order-in-council of cabinet.
But the government does want changes at the public service commission, the independent agency that oversees human resources in the government.
“We want some of these commissions to reflect the direction of the provincial government. We thought this was an opportunity to bring some new perspective to the public service commission,” Elhard told reporters outside a meeting of cabinet at the legislature on Wednesday [Oct. 8, 2008].
Burns sat on a three-person panel of public service commissioners who heard the case of the former assistant deputy minister of labour who had been terminated in January with other civil servants after the Saskatchewan Party took power last fall.
The panel ordered that he be put on a “re-employment list” and be paid as much as 20 months salary.
It also strongly took issue with Deputy Premier Ken Krawetz’s contention that perceived political ideology was an appropriate criterion for firing career civil servants.
http://owlsandroosters.blogspot.com, October 10, 2008
Interesting to note that the government does seem to be at least acknowledging that to fire someone mid-term over polical differences is problematic. That's a change from their perspective back in March, when they terminated the Chair and VC of the LRB in the middle of a hearing.