If there is disagreement, a third-party court will be brought to assist with the decision. However, the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada accepted the judge. The Court ruled on the “trilogue” cases and found that the right to strike is an essential element of the right to meaningful collective bargaining, protected by the charter. The ban on the PSESA strike has significantly affected this right, violated S. 2 (d) charter`s application and is not justified by Charter P. 1. The Court quashed PSESA, but suspended the declaration for one year. The Saskatchewan government passed a series of legislative amendments to the Saskatchewan Employment Act after the Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that the previous Essential Services Act was unconstitutional. The Court wrote that if an employer does not act in good faith or if collective bargaining is not deadlocked, workers must have recourse. The ability to participate in the collective withdrawal of services provides workers with an important opportunity to pursue collective work objectives and collective bargaining. In the absence of the right to strike, the constitutionally protected right to negotiate is “unnecessary.” In 2007, the Saskatchewan government passed the Essential Services of the Public Service Act (PSESA) and the Trade Union Amendment Act (TUAA). PSESA gave the government the power to unilaterally designate “essential” services and employees. PSESA also banned employees of essential services, went on strike.
However, the legislation did not provide a valid alternative (for example. B the interest rate arbitrage procedure) to resolve trading problems. The TUAA has changed the union certification process by increasing the level of staff support required, reducing the amount of time unions have collected evidence of thought to support employees, and eliminating automatic certification. The legislation also expanded employers` rights to freedom of expression. The Court found that the violation of the Charter in a free and democratic society was not justified, since the PSESA strike restrictions went beyond the services reasonably necessary to provide essential services. PSESA allowed the government to describe many services as “essential”, even though services were not really necessary to prevent serious damage to the life, health or personal safety of the population, and demanded “essential services” from workers who also did not have to perform essential tasks during a strike. The legislation did not provide for an independent verification procedure for government appointments by the Employment Office and did not create an “appropriate, impartial and effective” alternative mechanism for resolving negotiations (e.g. B the interest rate arbitrage procedure). An arbitration panel is also convened when the essential service agreement prevents a strike or lockout.
These amendments are in the form of amendments to the Saskatchewan Employment Act. The definition of essential services has been removed. Instead, each party will decide which services are needed. As lower courts begin to apply the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, Workwise will report on all important developments affecting employers, unions and workers. In Saskatchewan Federation of Labour in Saskatchewan, 2015 CSC 4, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the right to strike is protected by the right to freedom of association, guaranteed by see 2 (d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The decision of 52 overstuned the legal precedents in force since 1987, significantly increases the legal power of unionized workers (particularly in the public sector) and promises profound repercussions on labour relations in Canada.