Call Us Now

Blog

Union Fines are Not Legally Enforceable – Part II

Posted On: January, 23 2015

The Relationship between Individual Members and Their Unions is Contractual

In Ontario, unions have unsuccessfully advanced two different arguments to try to persuade the courts to enforce internal union fines. Both arguments are premised on an important Supreme Court of Canada decision: Berry v. Pulley, 2002 SCC 40. This decision found that an individual union member’s relationship with his or union is “in the nature” of a contractual relationship. Each union member this connected to the union as a whole by virtue of a written or implied individual contract. In essence, the contract requires that the union member agrees to pay dues to the union and to abide by the union’s rules, and in exchange the union agrees to represent the member in his or her relationship with the employer.

The Contractual Relationship is Unequal and Unusual

It is important to note that the contract is not a typical contract between two parties with equal bargaining power. The Supreme Court has said that a union constitution is “in the nature of a contract.” The Supreme Court has found that the contract existing or implied between an individual member and his or her union is a contract of adhesion – in other words it is a contract that is presented on a “take it or leave it” basis. A person who joins a union (typically because he or she has been hired by a unionized employer) has no real power to object to particular provisions in the union constitution, or to try to negotiate for changes to the union constitution. If the person wants the job, they’ll have to accept the union’s rules as they exist.

Unions have argued that individual members, once they’ve joined the union, have the ability to run for executive positions, and/or vote for their preferred candidates to join the executive, and therefore should be able to advocate for changes to the constitution. The courts have rejected this argument because by the time a person has been hired and initiated into the union as a condition of employment, the member has already been bound by the existing constitution. The inequality of bargaining power in this contract of adhesion exists at the formation of the contractual relationship. The limited ability of an individual member to seek changes to the union constitution afterward is not relevant.

 

Contact Us

RECENT NEWS & EVENTS

5 STAR REVIEWS

  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by SB

    I just wanted to let you know how happy I am with the outcome and how very grateful I am for the guidance and support that you and your team provided.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Google user

    Patrick James is really a great lawyer who is smart and great to deal with. He's been our litigation counsel for over 5 years on several different matters. Patrick recently gave our company great strategic advice that resulted in a big commercial litigation win for our company. He's fierce, tenacious, and really cares about getting the best outcome for his clients.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Google user

    Patrick is a very good lawyer. He recently successfully defended a lawsuit against my company and has pursued several litigation claims for us in the past. All claims settled input favour. Mr. James is smart and quickly gives you great strategic advice. Patrick has been a real asset to our business.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Sandra L.

    Andrew Wray and Patrick James recently helped settle a difficult situation for me and my family. The results were exactly what we were hoping for. They are honest, strategic and will provide you with the best advice for you and your financial situation. I highly recommend them to everyone I know.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Mark C.

    Their team is highly focused and incredibly professional - from our experience it would be difficult not to believe that Pinto Wray James are one of Ontario's leading Firms in Labor and Employment law. The mindful client care and complete understanding of the case eased fears and the stress that comes with any legal dispute. Expect to find high level smartly crafted legal solutions at Pinto Wray James LLP - couldn't recommend more.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Sherry C.

    Patrick is knowledgeable, strategic, supportive, and patient. His guidance and advice helped me to maintain focus and to keep things in perspective. His experience and keen perception provides him with an edge that allows him to assess the situation, the people involved, and to offer a strategic resolution that works best for all involved. If you ever require legal advice and assistance, I highly recommend him and his team. They will be there 100% for you.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Christian V.

    Patrick is a fearless advocate for diverse clients. His strategic approach, and his empathy, are what set him apart as a litigator, and champion of the underdog.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by A Google User

    I have no hesitation recommending Andrew Wray of Pinto Wray James LLP. He provided me with legal advice regarding an employment law issue and his council was practical and honest. Andrew's approach is very much one of blending legal excellence with good common sense. An excellent lawyer!
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto Wray James Reviewed by Larry S.

    Patrick listens to his clients and shows compassion, empathy and professionalism. He cares deeply that the individual that has been wrongfully terminated gets the best judgment available to him. I would not hesitate in recommending him to friends or family.
Submit