Canadain Supreme Court Rules Against Walmart

[frigidmagi]

Montrealgazette

Union activists claimed victory Friday as the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against Walmart and in favour of the continent’s first unionized Walmart employees in Jonquière.

The company shut down its box store in the Saguenay region in 2005, seven months after the employees were certified to join the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

In a 5-2 decision, the court agreed with arguments by about 200 laid-off employees that the company made unjustified changes to working conditions in violation of Section 59 of the Labour Code.

That portion of the Labour Code states that all working conditions must be frozen from the time a union applies for certification until a collective agreement is negotiated. The court found that a labour arbitrator was right in ordering compensation for employees. The arbitrator found Walmart’s decision to close was not based on its sales, but rather the employees’ move to unionize. The arbitrator found the store was performing well at the time that Walmart decided to close it. Walmart did not challenge this assertion in court.

“We think this is a great victory for the workers of Walmart in Jonquière and the whole of labour in general,” said Bernard Philion, the lawyer who represented the employees.

Paul Meinema, the national president of UFCW Canada agreed, saying it’s a message for Walmart to stop its union-busting tactics.

“Year after year, Walmart uses dirty tricks to stop its associates from exercising their democratic right to join a union, and that’s exactly what happened with the employees at the Jonquière store,” Meinema said. “This ruling serves as a major positive landmark.”

Walmart spokesperson Alex Patterson issued a statement saying the company was disappointed by the decision. He said the company will review the decision to determine its next step.

The ruling comes after several legal battles between Walmart and the unionized employees.

Walmart had originally won a 2009 case where the Supreme Court ruled the company was allowed to shut down its store for reasons it saw fit.

In that ruling, Justice Ian Binnie pointed out there isn’t any Quebec legislation obliging employers to remain in business even if it closes for “socially reprehensible” reasons.

In its decision Friday, Justice Louis Lebel explained that while a company is permitted to shut down its store, it is not permitted to alter the working conditions of its employees without justification.

In this case, shutting down the store without good reason was a violation of Section 59.

An arbitrator ruled in 2009 that the employees were entitled to compensation under the Labour Code. That decision was upheld by the Quebec Superior Court in 2010, but the Quebec Court of Appeal reversed that decision in 2012. Friday’s judgment rules in favour of the arbitrator’s original 2009 decision. The company will be ordered to pay compensation to the dismissed employees, an amount that will be determined at a later date.

Despite the court victory, there are currently no unionized Walmart stores, and experts say it’s unlikely Friday’s decision will change that situation.

David Doorey, a labour law professor at York University in Toronto, told Reuters he didn’t think the decision would embolden Walmart employees to unionize, given that in this case, the unionized workers still lost their jobs.

“That message leaves a chill over all other Walmart employees who would dare to exercise their legal rights to choose collective bargaining,” he said.

Because of the 2009 decision, Walmart would be allowed to close its store after a collective agreement had been negotiated, without incurring a penalty.

It has been a tough road for organized labour at Walmart stores in Canada. Two collective agreements were successfully negotiated with Walmart stores in Gatineau and St-Hyacinthe, but the tire shop where unionized employees worked in Gatineau was closed by the company, and the employees at the union in St-Hyacinthe voted to decertify in 2011. In Weyburn, Sask., a union was certified in 2008, but employees voted to decertify the union two years later.

That's gotta sting.

[LadyTevar]

What is this, 1920s coal companies? Shut down the mine so the Unionizers lose?

[Steve]

It's been common practice for Wal-Mart and other retail outfits, whenever they're forced to allow local Unionization they shut the store down, no matter how profitable.

[LadyTevar]

There shoul be a law against that.