Case information

Labour relations – Collective agreements – Arbitration – Grievances – Administrative law – Judicial review – Union seeking entitlement of certain class of members to overtime pay – Whether the Court of Appeal of Quebec erroneously determined that the arbitrator did not unreasonably interpret provisions contained in the Canada Labour Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. L-2, and erroneously overturned the judgment from the Superior Court of Quebec quashing the arbitration award – Whether the interpretation by the Court of Appeal of Quebec of the overtime scheme contained in the Code is erroneous – Whether the Court of Appeal of Quebec erroneously determined that the union raised a new argument in judicial review.

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.

The collective agreement between the Canadian National Railway (“the employer”) and Teamsters (“the union”) recognizes two classifications of train conductors. Classification A conductors hold “road assignments”, such as work on freight trains in transit between different rail terminals. Classification B conductors hold “yard or home terminal assignments”, working on freight cars within a local yard. A dispute arose between the employer and the union over the right of classification A conductors to overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40 hours a week. The union took the position that the collective agreement entitles those train conductors to overtime pay. The dispute was referred to an arbitrator of the Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration and Dispute Resolution. The arbitrator concluded that classification A conductors are not entitled to overtime pay and dismissed the union’s grievance.