Case information

Administrative law — Judicial review — Union grievance filed against company — Court of Appeal upholding arbitrator’s award that company breached collective agreement — When labour boards and arbitrators act as parallel decision-makers, when must a departure from past practices or decisions be justified.

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 respondent, United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada, Local 864 (“the Union”) was the certified bargaining agent for employees of the applicant, Sproule Lumber, a division of J.D. Irving Limited. The parties entered into a collective bargaining agreement, which was to cover their relationship until April 15, 2023 (the “CBA”).

Labour relations between the Union and Sproule Lumber did not go smoothly during the term of the CBA. By the fall of 2020, meetings were no longer taking place to discuss potential grievances, shop steward positions were unfilled and the communications between the parties were becoming strained. In November 2020, Sproule Lumber began writing directly to employees and criticizing the actions of certain union officials. One of the letters encouraged employees to inquire into the activities of the senior union representative and decide for themselves if his actions supported positive labour relations between the parties.

In December 2020, Sproule Lumber wrote to the Union suggesting it would cease complying with its obligations under the CBA to deduct and remit union membership dues until the Union came into compliance with the CBA and began acting in good faith.

In February 2021, the Union filed a grievance against Sproule Lumber alleging violations of several articles of the CBA based upon the allegedly unreasonable refusal to schedule and attend regular meetings with the Union.

The arbitrator found Sproule Lumber’s failure to attend meetings was not a breach of the CBA because the Union had failed in its obligation to provide sufficient information in advance concerning the subjects to be discussed. The arbitrator went on to find that Sproule Lumber had breached the CBA by the letters sent to the employees and the Union in November and December 2020.

Sproule Lumber initiated a judicial review proceeding in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court challenging the arbitrator’s award on the basis it was unreasonable. The reviewing judge quashed the award and remitted the matter for a hearing before a different arbitrator.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and reinstated the arbitrator’s award.