LABOUR RELATIONS |
ADM Agri-Industries Ltée v. Syndicat national des employés de Les Moulins Maple Leaf (de l'Est) (CSN)
A-698-02
2004 FCA 69, Décary and Nadon JJ.A.
16/2/04
26 pp.
Judicial review of decision by Canada Industrial Relations Board (Board) sitting in review pursuant to Canada Labour Code (Code), s. 18 of decision by Ms. Pineau, vice-chairperson of Board, concluding effects of collective agreement applicable to parties terminated on April 3, 1999--On review Board concluded Ms. Pineau erred in interpretation of Code, and application of clause 34.01 of collective agreement (providing agreement would continue to apply until right to strike or lock-out exercised) did not in any way contravene Code--ADM Agri-Industries Ltée (applicant or employer) asked Court to set aside Board's decision because Board exceeded jurisdiction and because decision patently unreasonable--Applicant maintained Board exceeded jurisdiction by agreeing to hear application to review, discontinued by union (respondent), and by reviewing decision in absence of circumstances specified by regulation-- First, from outset Board validly presented with application for review and continued to validly have application before it, since it disallowed discontinuance proposed by respondent-- Board does not automatically give effect to discontinuance as it has discretion to disallow it--As decision by which Board disallowed discontinuance not subject of application for judicial review, it follows one has to assume there was no discontinuance and Board still duly had review application before it--Applicant's argument not valid in law either as, even if Board proceeded to review of its own motion, it would have acted within jurisdiction--Code, s. 18 authorizes Board to "review, rescind, amend, alter or vary any order or decision made by it"--That section gave Board power to review decision of its own motion--Also, list of circumstances presented in Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2001, s. 44 (Regulations) not exhaustive--Board has clearly reserved considerable latitude--Applicable test in following passage from Société Radio-Canada (Re), [2002] CIRB No. 195: "In fact, errors of law or policy that cast serious doubt on the Board's interpretation of the Code must be demonstrated" --This test broad enough to authorize Board to reconsider any matter which is prima facie question of law, principle or policy with far-reaching effects--Nature of question such that undoubtedly basis for reconsideration--Especially as there was contradiction to be resolved between decision by Board member and decision by arbitrator approved by Quebec Superior Court judge--Finally, on patently unreasonable nature of decision, applicant's argument invalid--Applicant did not put forward any reason capable of persuading Court Board's decision patently unreasonable--What employer actually suggested was interpretation different from that at which Board arrived--Board's decision can be rationally supported by relevant legislation; Board exercised expertise it is deemed to have to interpret Code, which is its enabling statute--Also interpreted provision of agreement in way which unquestionably falls within purposes of Code--Its actions not patently unreasonable--Worth noting arbitrator Pierre Dufresne and Fraiberg J. of Quebec Superior Court came to same conclusion as Board--In Consolidated Bathurst Inc. v. Syndicat national des travailleurs de pâtes et papiers de Port-Alfred, [1997] R.J.Q. 520 (C.A.), Quebec Court of Appeal clearly indicated that in Bradburn v. Wentworth Arms Hotel Ltd. et al., [1979] 1 S.C.R. 846, Supreme Court had recognized validity of clauses extending application of working conditions of expired collective agreement, so long as latter did not impede exercise of strike and lock-out rights --In short, clause 34.01 of collective agreement not in any way ambiguous--Expressly provides that collective agreement will apply until parties have exercised their rights to strike or lock-out--Application dismissed--Canada Labour Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. L-2, s. 18--Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2001, SOR/2001-520, s. 44.