Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Labour relations – Collective agreement – Pension plan – Jurisdiction of grievance arbitrator – Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction – Whether pension plan can be considered integral part of new collective agreement in this case – Whether arbitrator has absolute jurisdiction over employees’ conditions of employment where collective agreement exists.

The Applicants were employees working in the distribution centres of Hudon et Daudelin Ltée, which at the time was an integral part of the Oshawa Group Ltd. They were all unionized, and were all members of a defined benefit pension plan under their collective agreement.

In 1998, Sobeys purchased the Oshawa Group and therefore assumed all rights and obligations under the collective agreement. During bargaining to renew the collective agreement, Sobeys insisted that all employees, including the Applicants, be included in its existing pension plan. However, the new pension plan provided that employees formerly with the Oshawa Group who were over 50 years old, which excluded the Applicants, had the choice of remaining members of the Oshawa Group pension plan or joining the Sobeys pension plan.

According to the Applicants, their inclusion in the Sobeys pension plan occurred unilaterally, without their consent. The Applicants argued that, since the obligation to maintain a pension plan and the terms and conditions of that plan were not included in the collective agreement, it followed that disputes concerning the obligation they claimed the employer had in this case, namely maintaining the former plan, were not arbitrable and that the only existing remedy was one to be sought in a court of law.

Sobeys moved to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction.