The appellant unions challenged the constitutionality of the federal Expenditure Restraint Act (ERA) and the Government's conduct in collective bargaining, arguing they infringed their members' freedom of association under s. 2(d) of the Charter.
The ERA imposed wage increase caps and rolled back previously negotiated increases in response to the 2008 global economic crisis.
The Court of Appeal held that the ERA and the Government's conduct did not substantially interfere with the collective bargaining process.
In the alternative, any limits on s. 2(d) rights were demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter given the pressing and substantial objective of managing the economic crisis.
The court also upheld the application judge's decision to admit and prefer the evidence of the Government's participant expert over the unions' expert.
