Sébastien Gobeil

This appeal asked whether a Quebec heavy-equipment company’s labour relations were federally regulated because some employees performed stevedoring work tied to shipping.

The Court held that labour relations are presumptively provincial and that derivative federal jurisdiction applies only where federally related work is dominant or performed by a functionally discrete unit integral to a federal undertaking.

Tessier’s stevedoring represented a minor share of revenue and employee time, and its workforce was integrated across local and shipping tasks.

The Court concluded the undertaking’s essential operational nature remained local and provincial occupational health and safety legislation governed.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The union filed a grievance against a decision not to renew the contract of a university professor, arguing it amounted to a dismissal without good and sufficient cause under the collective agreement and s. 124 of the Act respecting labour standards.

The arbitrator found the collective agreement established an equivalent remedial procedure and ordered the parties to proceed under it.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the collective agreement's provisions regarding dismissal were sufficiently clear and provided an equivalent procedure to s. 124, giving the arbitrator jurisdiction to hear the grievance without incorporating the statutory provision.

Two employers closed their businesses and gave their unionized employees notice of termination in accordance with the Act respecting labour standards.

The unions filed grievances claiming additional termination pay based on the reasonable notice requirement in art. 2091 of the Civil Code of Québec.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the arbitrators did not have jurisdiction to hear the grievances because the individual right to reasonable notice of termination under the Civil Code is incompatible with the collective labour relations scheme.