Your search

The scope of labour rights that are protected by constitutional protections of freedom of association is highly contested and, increasingly, is being litigated before courts. In Canada, the Supreme Court began in 2001 to chip away at jurisprudence that provided a narrow interpretation of freedom of association, and, in 2007, it over-ruled precedent to hold that freedom of association includes collective bargaining. However, this incremental expansion of the freedom of association to include core labour rights came to a halt in the Supreme Court's April 2011 decision Attorney General of Ontario v Fraser. Although a majority of the Court agreed that freedom of association includes collective bargaining, Fraser is remarkable for the extent of disagreement amongst members of the Court over the scope of collective bargaining and how this disagreement has influenced the tone and cogency of the Court's reasoning. This article begins by providing a history of the successive rounds of litigation leading to the Supreme Court's decision in Fraser. This legal context is important because it is barely visible in the majority and concurring judgments, which read as if collective bargaining rights for agricultural workers were a subsidiary concern, and not the issue in dispute. The article then examines the four judgments that make up the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Fraser, focusing exclusively on the freedom of association arguments. The implications of the Fraser decision for the immediate future of constitutional litigation and labour rights in Canada are discussed in the final section.

Explains in detail the purpose of the book (see publisher's description) and provides a synopsis of the essays contained therein.

Examines the Supreme Court's decision on Fraser in the context of the broader political battle on labour rights. The author links the decline in union density to increasing inequality in income and taxation. Canada's failure to ratify or comply with international conventions of labour rights is also analyzed.

On 29 April 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada released its much-anticipated decision in Attorney General of Ontario v Fraser, which dealt with the scope of constitutional protection of collective bargaining. The case involved a constitutional challenge to an Ontario statute on the grounds that it violated agricultural workers’ freedom of association and right to equality by excluding them from the statutory protection that is available to virtually all other private sector workers and by failing to provide them with alternative legislative support for meaningful and effective collective bargaining rights. Although the Court upheld the constitutionality of the legislation by an eight to one majority, it provided four different, and incommensurable, sets of reasons. For the union that instigated the litigation, Fraser is a defeat. For the labour movement and their advocates, Fraser is ambiguous. What is clear, however, is that the Supreme Court of Canada was badly divided over the scope of protection that freedom of association provides to the right to bargain collectively. This collection of original essays untangles the two stories that are intertwined in the Fraser decision—the story of the farm workers and their union’s attempt to obtain rights at work available to other working people in Ontario, and the tale of judicial discord over the meaning of freedom of association in the context of work. The contributors include trade unionists, lawyers, and academics (several of whom were involved in Fraser as witnesses, parties, lawyers, and interveners). The collection provides the social context out of which the decision emerged, including a photo essay on migrant workers, while at the same time illuminating Fraser’s broader jurisprudential and institutional implications. --Publisher's description. Introduction: Farm Workers, Collective Bargaining Rights, and the Meaning of Constitutional Protection / Judy Fudge -- Farm Worker Exceptionalism: Past, Present, and the post-Fraser Future / Eric Tucker -- The Roots of Organizing Agriculture Workers in Canada / Wayne Hanley -- Development as Remittances or Development as Freedom? Exploring Canada’s Temporary Migration Programs from a Rights-based Approach / Kerry Preibisch -- Envisioning Equality: Analogous Grounds and Farm Workers’ Experience of Discrimination / Fay Faraday -- Harvest Pilgrims: Migrant Farm Workers in Ontario / Vincenzo Pietropaolo --The Fraser Case: A Wrong Turn in a Fog of Judicial Deference / Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo -- What Fraser Means For Labour Rights in Canada / Steven Barrett and Ethan Poskanzer -- Labour Rights: A Democratic Counterweight to Growing Income Inequality in Canada / Derek Fudge -- The International Constitution / Patrick Macklem -- Giving Life to the ILO: Two Cheers for the SCC / K.D. Ewing and John Hendy.

Compares the case law on Fraser and Dunsmore and critiques the Supreme Court's failure in Fraser to address the functional nature of the discrimination against farm workers as an issue of equality rights under Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,

[Provides] a critical examination of Canada's Temporary Migration Programs for agriculture. I show how migrants are positioned to be relatively more vulnerable than other workers within the country's food agricultural system owing to their position at the bottom of the occupational hierarchy, their precarious immigration status as temporary "foreign" workers, and their racialization as non-Whites from the global South. Moreover, I illustrate how changes to policies of temporary migration have constituted farm work as an even more precarious form of employment for migrants in particular, but also Canadians.... Finally, while recognizing that TMPs may contribute to aspects fo economic development, enabling participants to access income and assets formerly out of their reach, I call for greater attention to the rights, welfare, and dignity of migrants when considering temporary migrations programs.

Annotated photographs of migrant farmers in Ontario from 1984 to 2009, drawn from the author's book, "Harvest Pilgrim's" (Between the Lines, 2009).

Analyzes the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on freedom of association, notably B.C. Health Services (2007), in respect to Canada's constitutional relationship with international law.

Describes the efforts of agricultural workers to obtain legal protection with particular reference to legislation and proceedings in Ontario. Concludes that despite legal setbacks, the struggle continues through the Agriculture Worker Alliance of the United Food and Commercial Workers.

The author, who was the farm workers' legal representative before the Supreme Court in the Fraser case, provides historical background and analyzes the court's decision, including its reliance on judicial deference to the legislature. Concludes that the court was preoccupied with the larger political battle rather than the constitutional merits of the case.

An analysis of the impact of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Fraser on protection of freedom of association in the collective bargaining context in Canada, with particular emphasis on the different approaches taken by the Court, including the dissenting reasons of Justice Rothstein, and what those reasons reveal about the Court's disagreement over the scope of freedom of association in the collective bargaining context.

Considers the intersection of relevant conventions of the International Labour Organization, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and labour case law of the Supreme Court of Canada. Asserts that the Canadian government is bound by ILO membership to promote collective bargaining, and that the Supreme Court's reliance on ILO principles was fully justified in Dunmore and BC Health Services. Concludes that, although the court's decision on Fraser fails to implement these principles, the right to strike in Canada will eventually be constitutionally recognized.