Faced with a concerted refusal to work overtime, the Union cannot remain passive
Release date: May 1st, 2011
FACED WITH A CONCERTED REFUSAL TO WORK OVERTIME, THE UNION CANNOT REMAIN PASSIVE
The employer lodged a grievance demanding compensation from the union for lost revenues due to the employees’ concerted refusal to work overtime. According to the arbitrator, though the union does not have an obligation of result with respect to bringing an end to all illegal pressure tactics by employees, it must nevertheless use reasonable means to prevent them. It is not enough for the union to show that it is not the instigator of the slow-down; it must also establish that it has done everything it could to put an end to it. By their inaction, the President and the union representatives committed a fault for which the union can be held liable. The arbitrator sentenced the union to compensate the employer for losses incurred as a result of the work slow-down, but dismissed the personal claim against the President and the union representatives. Arcelormittal Mines Canada v. United Steelworkers (employer grievance), 2010EXPT-475, DTE 2010T-117 (T.A.) Me Nicolas Cliche
From bulletin Gestion Plus
To suscribe, click here!
Back to the list
To the exclusive service of employers, Le Corre offers training workshops and publications on subjects solely pertaining to labour law. Both these tools help managers and human resources professionals to deal more effectively with the daily legal framework of their businesses.