News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.5K     0 

The_Cat said:
The landmark Supreme Court of Canada ruling
  • Who: The B.C. Teachers' Federation (BCTF) vs. the B.C. government.
  • What happened: The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the B.C. government had violated the teachers' freedom of association under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by stripping class size and composition protections from their collective agreements.
  • When: The ruling was made in November 2016.
  • Significance: The decision sent a strong message to governments across Canada to respect collective bargaining and cannot act unilaterally to remove these protections. It restored contract provisions on class size and composition that were in place in 2002.
Click to expand...
I'm not even sure that one is relevant. In that case BC had negotiated class size and composition into a contract, then a new government was elected and they decided to renege on the deal claiming the previous government had made a deal that "was not in the scope of collective bargaining". The BCTF took it to the supreme court and won that it was valid and forced BC to honor the contract. However, Alberta has never had class size/composition in their contracts so the supreme court has nothing to impose. I think the province is trying to avoid having class size/complexity imposed by an arbitrator, but even then it makes no sense as I think any arbitration would be limited by the Public Education Collective Bargaining Act which limits working conditions negotiations to the school board level.
 
BrettB said:
I'm not sure why the notwithstanding clause would even come into play.

For better or worse, governments are within their rights to legislate people back to work. It happens with alarming regularity in Canada.

The response by unions will be interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes, they really didn't have to use this. However, it is not surprising that Smith and the UCP are now treating rights like something to be crumpled up and discarded when inconvenient.

It is totally consistent with her autocratic style.
 
Meanwhile....

www.ctvnews.ca

‘Forever Canadian’ petition surpasses goal, collects 456K signatures

Thomas Lukaszuk, a former deputy premier of Alberta who has circulated a petition to make it official policy for the province to stay in Canada, says it has just over 456,000 signatures.
www.ctvnews.ca www.ctvnews.ca

Thomas Lukaszuk, a former deputy premier of Alberta who has circulated a petition to make it official policy for the province to stay in Canada, says it has just over 456,000 signatures.

The final tally is far greater than the required 294,000 signatures to initiate a possible referendum in Alberta.

The “Forever Canadian” petition asks: “Do you agree that Alberta should remain within Canada?”
 
1761674406115.png
 
If you're going to bring back to work legislation/notwithstanding clause and have it pushed through, show up and speak to it in debate. She took the cowards way out.

They could have changed her flight and all that but she chose to leave the country instead. I don't care if it was a pre-planned trip, move things around and don't take the cowards way out.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top