Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - REPORT_NO400, October 2022

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

1. 21. The Committee last examined this case in which the complainant, the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), Local 113, alleged that its members had been deprived of their right to strike and their right to freely negotiate their employment by virtue of a legislation (Toronto Transit Commission Labour Disputes Resolution Act, 2011), which declared the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) to be an essential service, at its March 2016 meeting [see 377th Report, paras 215–244]. On that occasion, the Committee made the following recommendation:
   • In light of the review to be carried out on the operation of the Act in the very near future, the Committee urges the Government to takes the necessary steps so that the Government of Ontario will review the Toronto Transit Commission Labour Disputes Resolution Act, 2011, in consultation with the social partners, in a manner so as to ensure the rights of TTC workers. It requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.
2. 22. In a communication dated 18 February 2022, the ATU, Local 113, expresses its disappointment with the results of the review of the Toronto Transit Commission Labour Dispute Resolution Act (TTCLDRA) by a third party, who recommended no changes to be made to the legislation. Accordingly, the complainant submits, the legislation continues to prohibit Local 113 members, employees of the TTC, from engaging in any form of work stoppage and thereby strips Local 113 of its bargaining powers. The complainant explains that the review did not take into account all issues pertaining to “workers’ rights”, considered as relating solely to the constitutionality of the TTCLDRA and thus outside the scope of the review. Likewise, the reviewer declined to comment in what manner the Government was in breach of its international legal obligations, namely the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).
3. 23. According to the complainant, in the years following the review, the Government has continued to refuse to amend the TTCLDRA and the labour relations between the parties have reached an all-time low. The TTC and Local 113 have had a collective agreement imposed on them by an interest arbitrator in each round of bargaining that has taken place (in 2018 and 2021). In the last round of bargaining which concluded on 4 January 2022, the parties failed to negotiate a single substantive term.
4. 24. In its communication dated 2 May 2022, the Government of Canada transmits the observations of the Government of Ontario, in which the latter argues that the TTCLDRA does not violate the Convention No. 87, the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154). The Government states that it engaged an independent neutral expert to conduct a review of the TTCLDRA in accordance with Committee’s recommendations and that no further inquiry is necessary. The Government also states that key stakeholders and social partners, such as Local 113, participated in the review and provided detailed submissions. The primary recommendation arising from the five-year review was to retain the TTCLDRA as such, to which the Government has complied. The Government of Ontario requests the present case be closed.
5. 25. The Committee notes with regret that the TTCLDRA has not been amended as per its recommendation made in 2016. While noting the Ontario Government’s statement that the Act is in compliance with Conventions Nos 87, 98 and 154, the Committee recalls that its mandate is to determine whether any given legislation complies with the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining laid down in relevant Conventions. Moreover, when a State decides to become a Member of the International Labour Organization, it accepts fundamental principles embodied in the Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia, encompassing the principles of freedom of association [see Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, paras 9 and 44].
6. 26. The Committee refers the Government to its previous conclusions set out in paragraphs 240–243 of its 377th Report wherein it concluded that: (1) metropolitan transport did not constitute an essential service in the strict sense of the term, but a public service of primary importance where the requirement of a minimum service in the event of a strike could be justified; and (2) that legislative provisions which establish that, failing agreement between the parties, the points at issue in collective bargaining must be settled by arbitration were not in conformity with the principle of voluntary negotiation.
7. 27. The Committee reiterates its previous conclusions and once again urges the Government to review the TTCLDRA in consultation with the social partners concerned without further delay. The Committee refers the legislative aspect of this case to the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. In these circumstances, the Committee considers that this case is closed and will not pursue its examination.