Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 354, Junio 2009

Caso núm. 2173 (Canadá) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 07-FEB-02 - Cerrado

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 35. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns violations of freedom of association principles on collective bargaining in respect of public employees through several pieces of legislation in the education sector (Bills Nos 15, 18, 27 and 28), at its March 2006 meeting [see 340th Report, paras 42–49]. The Committee wishes to recall that it had initially examined several cases of collective bargaining restrictions by the Government of the Province of British Columbia in the education sector as well as in the health and social services together with this case [see Cases Nos 2166, 2180 and 2196, 330th Report]. The Committee recalls that, as regards the education sector and this specific case, it had in particular recommended the Government to repeal Bill No. 18; to adopt a flexible approach, eventually amending Bill No. 27 to give the parties an opportunity to vary by agreement the working conditions unilaterally imposed by the legislation; and to include in the mandate of the Commission established under Bill No. 27, the issues raised in connection with Bill No. 28 [see 330th Report, para. 305(a)(i)–(iv)]. The Committee had also noted that the Minister of Labour had appointed an individual to consult with interested parties and to recommend terms of reference for a review commission, and that based on its report, the Minister had appointed, in December 2003, a commissioner who would consult with groups in the education sector and review procedures in other jurisdictions to recommend procedures for a new collective bargaining arrangement. The Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed on the conclusions of the review commission [see 333rd Report, paras 23–30].
2. 36. In a communication dated 20 May 2008, Education International and the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) provided additional information which relates to findings of a decision of 2007 of the Supreme Court of Canada concluding that certain provisions of the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act interfered with the process of collective bargaining protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [Decision of the Supreme Court, Health Services and Support – Facilities Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC27]. The complainants underline that for the first time the Supreme Court of Canada extended constitutional protections to collective bargaining rights by virtue of section 2(d) of the Charter.
3. 37. The complainants indicated that, following that decision, the Government of the Province of British Columbia signed settlement agreements with health-care workers in the four health-care bargaining associations. It committed 85 million Canadian dollars for compensation, retraining, clinical upgrading and professional development, and settled more than 3,000 outstanding grievances relating to the legislation and its effects on health-care workers.
4. 38. While commending the settlement between the Government of the Province of British Columbia and the bargaining associations in the health-care sector pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, the BCTF indicates that it had advised the Government of its intention to pursue its constitutional challenge of the legislation concerning the education sector in court, and despite this knowledge the Government has not sought resolution of the case.
5. 39. In a communication dated 2 March 2009, in reply to the complainants’ communication above, the Government states that in response to the Health Services decision it reached agreements with various health sector bargaining associations and the Health Employers Association of British Columbia, and amended the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act (Bill No. 29) and the Health Sector Partnerships Agreement Act (Bill No. 94). The Government considers that these agreements and legislation are in conformity with the principles set out in the Health Services decision.
6. 40. The Government further states that it has undertaken numerous measures to facilitate and support the collective bargaining process between teachers and school employers. The Government states that in October 2005 it appointed an experienced mediator to act as an Industrial Inquiry Commission to make recommendations on the collective bargaining process between teachers and employers. The Commission’s role was to make inquiries, consult with the parties and make recommendations to the Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services concerning the following: matters which should be concluded at local bargaining; the methods and costs associated with the harmonization of compensations structures within the financial mandate established by the Government from time to time; establishment of a provincial master collective agreement; and bargaining processes for provincial negotiations that are timely, structured and provide for public accountability, promote settlement at the bargaining table, and foster effective and productive union/management relations. The Commission issued its final report on 2 February 2007, based on the Commission’s interim report of April 2006 which helped the collective bargaining of a five-year collective agreement effective 1 July 2006.
7. 41. Also in April 2006, the Government introduced the Education (Learning Enhancement) Statutes Amendment Act (Bill No. 33), establishing new class size limits, accountability measure and requirements for consulting parents and teachers on class size and composition.
8. 42. The Government further claims it created in fall 2005 a Learning Roundtable as a forum for education partners to discuss critical issues related to learning conditions in the public school system, such as class size and class composition. The Government indicates that by the end of 2006, over 130 public sector collective agreements were settled through collective bargaining, with further settlements thereafter, securing unprecedented labour peace in the province.
9. 43. The Committee takes note with great interest of the information provided by the complainants, in particular the decision dated 8 June 2007 of the Supreme Court of Canada, Health Services and Support – Facilities Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, 2007 SCC27, and the settlements between the Government of the Province of British Columbia and the bargaining associations representing health-care workers pursuant to that decision, thus resolving a number of the pending issues relating to collective bargaining raised in the Committee’s 330th Report. The Committee takes due note of the conclusions of the Supreme Court that “the protection of collective bargaining under section 2(d) of the Charter is consistent with and supportive of the values underlying the Charter and the purposes of the Charter as a whole” and that “recognizing that workers have the right to bargain collectively as part of their freedom to associate reaffirm the values of dignity, personal autonomy, equality and democracy that are inherent to the Charter”. It further notes with interest reference made by the Supreme Court to provisions of Convention No. 87 and to interpretations of the provisions and principles concerning collective bargaining by the various supervisory bodies of the ILO, including the Committee on Freedom of Association.
10. 44. The Committee further notes with interest that following the Supreme Court decision, agreements were concluded with health services bargaining associations and that a committee and roundtable composed of social partners to discuss issues of mutual interest were created. The Committee also notes that the Industrial Inquiry Commission, created in 2005 in order to improve bargaining between teachers and employers, issued its final report in February 2007. The Committee however notes with regret that, according to the BCTF, the Government of the Province of British Columbia had not shown any sign of willingness to search resolution of grievances concerning the education sector. It notes the intention of the BCTF to continue to pursue its constitutional challenge of the legislation concerning the education sector in court.
11. 45. The Committee trusts that the settlement reached by the Government of the Province of British Columbia and the bargaining associations in the health-care sector pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada of 8 June 2007, in relation to the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act will serve as an inspiration for the settlement of grievances prevailing in the education sector. It further trusts that the commissioner’s final report will prove helpful in further ameliorating the collective bargaining process between teachers and employers and asks the Government to keep it informed of the implementation of the report.
12. 46. In addition, the Committee notes with regret that the Government has failed to provide information on the measures taken to give effect to its previous recommendations with regard to the Skills Development and Labour Statutes Amendment Act and the Education Services Collective Agreement Act. The Committee expresses the firm hope that steps will be taken by the Government of the Province of British Columbia with a view to reaching a settlement with the unions concerned in the education sector in order to amend the legislation – in particular, the Skills Development and Labour Statutes Amendment Act and the Education Services Collective Agreement Act – so as to bring it into line with the principles of collective bargaining recalled by the Committee for many years and now enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Committee once again urges the Government to provide information without further delay on the steps taken in this regard.