News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.7K     0 

AlvinofDiaspar said:
Because making those who are barely keeping their heads above water destitute would look so good. I want to see them try doing it.

AoD
Click to expand...
Anyone remember in the spring of 2021, when they tried to ban going outside, only for all the police forces to turn around and say they wouldn't do it... except for the OPP?
 
nfitz said:
One question is how is this not cruel and unusual punishment? Which the courts were protecting before the Charter of Rights.

And heck, Section 12 of the Charter of Rights confirms the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Which Bill 28 did not suspend.

I'm surprised the union hasn't already filed for an injunction - perhaps they are waiting until all the rural MPs have left down for their ... (checks calendar) .... November break.

The government has screwed up in two ways here.

a) It's blatantly clear that the law won't stand - so it's no threat to the union. And an attempt to enforce it will likely lead to binding arbitration - so the union wins

b) even if the law stands, the penalties are so massive, there's no way the union can ever accept a settlement that doesn't remove the penalties - which makes it less likely the union will concede quickly

It's a shame we don't have a government that doesn't do what's necessary to keep kids in school
Click to expand...
The Charter protection against "cruel and unusual treatment and punishment" in Section 12 is included under Section 33 ('notwithstanding clause'). Even if it were not, the courts are fairly clear on what "punishment" means, but "treatment" hasn't been extensively defined.

I'm not sure I share your view that "the law won't stand". As odious as the legislation is, it seems to be completely within the law. Similarly, I'm not sure an injunction would be successful since I doubt a case could be made that the legislation is overreaching or being mis-applied.

By the way, the Act secures itself from review by both the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Labour Relations Board. Cleaver.

Keep in mind that the fines laid out in the Act are "up to". It would be within the power of the courts to impose $10 fines.
Admiral Beez said:
If the strike continues it will be interesting if there is a judge in the province willing to impose the $4,000 a day fines against these employees.

If it's an illegal strike why isn't the OPP enforcing the law?
Click to expand...
I did a quick scan of the Act. It seems any enforcement would fall to the police service of jurisdiction. I imagine they are sitting by the phone waiting for a complaint. There is nothing to prevent MAG, Crown Law to initiate proceedings.
 
T3G said:
Anyone remember in the spring of 2021, when they tried to ban going outside, only for all the police forces to turn around and say they wouldn't do it... except for the OPP?
Click to expand...
Really. I don't recall that list of all 53 municipal and FN police services lining up to declare their displeasure. Got a copy?
 
Premier Ford and Minister Clark have moved to savage the Greenbelt and the Oak Ridges Moraine Plans.

They are seeking to remove many thousands of acres from protection to permit sprawl; they are making some silly claims about offsetting this (as if they were tearing out sprawl somewhere else to restore nature)....

When in fact most of what they will newly protect is already municipal parkland.

I won't go on here, I have revived the old dedicated thread for this subject and posted the relevant maps, and contact links. Please follow my link here to that thread then please submit objections to the government in writing.

Doug Ford assured developers he plans to open up Greenbelt to housing development

Further to prior post: From the Greenbelt Plan: [...] 3.1.4 Rural Area Policies For lands falling within the rural area of the Protected Countryside the following policies shall apply: Rural areas support, and provide the primary locations for a range of recreational, tourism, institutional...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
One of the residents at the condo I manage works in the Premiers Office.

She was just telling me how they were writing up the legislation this week regarding the school strike. She ducked her head and ran out the front door of the building.
 
lenaitch said:
The Charter protection against "cruel and unusual treatment and punishment" in Section 12 is included under Section 33 ('notwithstanding clause').
Click to expand...
Section 33 does allow for the suspension of Section 12 the Charter. But look at Section 13 (1) of Bill 28. The language there says "Pursuant to subsection 33 (1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this Act is declared to operate notwithstanding sections 2, 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." For some reason, they didn't make it notwithstanding Section 12. In Quebec, they frequently use an or not an and.

Also "cruel and unusual treatment and punishment" rights existed long before the 1982 Charter. And Section 26 here is probably more important than Section 33 - which says "The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada."

The notwithstanding clause can not be applied to rights that already existed before 1982.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
If the strike continues it will be interesting if there is a judge in the province willing to impose the $4,000 a day fines against these employees.

If it's an illegal strike why isn't the OPP enforcing the law?
Click to expand...

This isn’t Oshawa, 1937. Though Ford has plenty in common with Mitch Hepburn.
 
Jonny5 said:
I know it's impossible to physically open schools, though there's tested online options now and that's one thing at least some parents want. I know a teacher in Peel Region who is doing the "asynchronous" independent learning today, and some parents are upset they aren't going to full online classes. The Peel board has told the teachers this morning that they will continue with the asynchronous on Monday, though what happens after that is still not decided. He says some teachers, though not all, will refuse to do online classes as it's circumventing the picket line. It will be interesting to see how that plays out if they push for it.
Click to expand...
If you don't work, you don't get paid.
 
Jonny5 said:
The hilarious part is you all knew exactly what I meant the whole time.
Click to expand...
That's true, but probably the people here are more informed than most people.
Misrepresenting the facts is not helpful. There are thousands of people that actually do believe the teachers are on strike today, and spreading that kind of misinformation online is not helpful.
 
wopchop said:
That's true, but probably the people here are more informed than most people.
Misrepresenting the facts is not helpful. There are thousands of people that actually do believe the teachers are on strike today, and spreading that kind of misinformation online is not helpful.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, though neither is an unhinged response (not yours)
 
The province really felt like shooting theirselves in the good foot today.

Many schools in Toronto have in-school daycare programs for before and after care, as well as P.A. Days and summer.

During times of on-line schooling, these daycares remained open, and kids with Chromebooks could log into their online classes from the daycare.

Today, many of these daycares ran for 8 hours, and were planning to run for the duration of the CUPE strike.

The Ministry told them today that they could not operate during the strike, leaving many parents out in the lurch for care.

Daycares are making it known that this is directly on the direction of Lecce.

Nothing like going out of your way to really stick it to working parents.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top