Case argues that B.C. premier's contract-breaking law was unconstitutional
On trial is Bill 29 – the 2002 legislation that shredded legally negotiated collective agreements paving the way for an unprecedented privatization of health care services and the mass firing of more than 8,000 health care workers – mostly women.
The legislation also made it easier for the government’s health authorities to close down or downgrade health care facilities across the province.
George Heyman, president of the British Columbia Government and Service Employees' Union (BCGEU/NUPGE), says the case is central to the preservation of the rights of workers to engage in free collective bargaining.
"This government has treated the collective bargaining process with contempt – and has been condemned by a United Nations’ agency no less than nine times in two years for its poor labour practices," says Heyman.
"Today’s decision by the Supreme Court of Canada to hear our appeal is a clear signal that Gordon Campbell is taking B.C. in the wrong direction when it comes to labour policy."
Joint action by unions
The BCGEU, the Hospital Employees’ Union, the B.C. Nurses’ Union, and several other unions first launched their constitutional challenge to Bill 29 – the Health and Social Services Delivery Act – in March, 2002.
The challenge was dismissed by the B.C. Supreme Court in September, 2003 and by the Appeal Court of B.C. in July, 2004. But the Supreme Court of Canada decision will now effectively put those court decisions on trial.
The unions’ constitutional challenge to Bill 29 involves both the equality and freedom of association provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In seeking leave to appeal the case to the Supreme Court of Canada, the unions’ argued that their challenge raised questions that are of national and public importance.
One such question is whether certain aspects of collective bargaining are protected by the freedom of association provisions contained in Section 2(d) of the Charter.
'Very significant'
Joseph Arvay, counsel for the unions, says that the "granting of leave is very significant since the Supreme Court of Canada had ruled in the late 1980’s that there is no constitutional right to collective bargaining in our Charter and this decision today would suggest that the Court might be prepared to reconsider that critically important constitutional question."
Another question raised by the unions is whether legislation that targets the collective agreements in the most female-dominated sectors of the economy – such as health care and community social services – violates the equality provisions contained in Section 15 when the legislation is aimed at depressing wages which have been subject to pay equity processes.
Bill 29 was passed in January, 2002 and voided many long-standing provisions of health care and community social services collective agreements including protections against contracting out, seniority rights and labour adjustment programs.
The Court has not yet scheduled hearing dates but is expected to do so
in the next few weeks. The case will likely be heard later this year or
early in 2006. The unions’ legal counsel is the B.C.-based firm Arvay
Finlay. NUPGE
Original Article is from the National Union of Public and General Employees website: http://www.nupge.ca/news_2005/n22ap05h.htm
