2 total
Municipality cannot unilaterally terminate firefighters' collective agreement by passing a by-law to use volunteers.
The appellant municipality sought to replace its full-time firefighters with volunteers and passed a by-law purporting to terminate the collective agreement.
The Court of Appeal upheld the decisions of the arbitrator and Divisional Court, finding that the collective agreement continued in effect beyond its expiry date due to the freeze provision in the Fire Protection and Fire Prevention Act, 1997.
The court held that the municipality could not unilaterally terminate the agreement, as the Act requires the consent of the Ontario Labour Relations Board on joint application, rendering the by-law of no effect.
Mandatory retirement at age 60 for police officers justified as a bona fide occupational requirement.
The respondent, a police officer, was forced to retire at age 60 pursuant to a mandatory retirement policy in the collective agreement.
He filed a human rights complaint alleging age discrimination.
The Board of Inquiry found the policy was not a bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) because the employer lacked a sincerely held belief in its necessity at the time of adoption, and because individual accommodation was possible.
The Divisional Court and Court of Appeal upheld this decision.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that the subjective element of the BFOR test can be satisfied where a policy is adopted in good faith through collective bargaining without ulterior motives.
The Court also held that the objective element does not require individual accommodation where a general rule is reasonably necessary and individual testing is impractical.
The mandatory retirement policy was justified as a BFOR.
