{"id":482,"date":"2017-02-20T10:24:54","date_gmt":"2017-02-20T15:24:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/00013ute.org\/?p=482"},"modified":"2017-02-20T10:25:28","modified_gmt":"2017-02-20T15:25:28","slug":"psac-legal-challenge-against-conservative-wage-rollbacks-endsfin-de-la-contestation-judiciaire-de-lafpc-concernant-la-reduction-des-salaires","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/2017\/02\/20\/psac-legal-challenge-against-conservative-wage-rollbacks-endsfin-de-la-contestation-judiciaire-de-lafpc-concernant-la-reduction-des-salaires\/","title":{"rendered":"PSAC legal challenge against Conservative wage rollbacks ends\/Fin de la contestation judiciaire de l\u2019AFPC concernant la r\u00e9duction des salaires"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=http:\/\/psacunion.ca\/psac-legal-challenge-against-conservative-wage>Source<\/a><\/p>\r\n<p><a href=http:\/\/psacunion.ca\/psac-legal-challenge-against-conservative-wage>Source, French<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n<p><b>PSAC legal challenge against Conservative wage rollbacks ends<\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>The Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear PSAC\u2019s legal challenge to the previous Conservative government\u2019s budget bill that rolled back negotiated wage increases for federal public service workers.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>The union argued that the legislation violated the Charter rights of PSAC members under section 2(d) \u201cfreedom of association\u201d.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>\u201cWe are surprised the Supreme Court has chosen not to hear our case as it is in direct contradiction to a recent ruling on collective bargaining rights,\u201d said PSAC National President Robyn Benson. \u201cBill C-10 significantly restricted our members\u2019 bargaining rights. Yet, in November 2016, the Court ruled against the British Columbia government for restricting the bargaining rights of provincial teachers.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>The BC government had removed negotiated clauses from the teachers\u2019 collective agreement and passed a law prohibiting the B.C. Teachers\u2019 Federation from negotiating them. The Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that the government\u2019s legislation was unconstitutional because it violated the Charter\u2019s \u201cfreedom of association\u201d clause.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>PSAC\u2019s legal battle started in 2009<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>PSAC filed an appeal in the Ontario Superior Court in 2009 after Bill C-10, the Conservatives Expenditure Restraint Act, had been passed. The Act set a maximum for pay increases for four years between 2006 and 2011 and rolled-back any negotiated increases that exceeded the maximum.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>The Act affected thousands of PSAC members in several bargaining units, including the Canada Revenue Agency.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>In 2014, the Ontario Superior Court ruled the legislation did not breach the Charter. In 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the Superior Court decision. PSAC then applied for leave to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p><b>Fin de la contestation judiciaire de l\u2019AFPC concernant la r\u00e9duction des salaires<\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>La Cour supr\u00eame du Canada a d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de ne pas entendre la contestation judiciaire de l\u2019AFPC concernant l\u2019ancienne loi d\u2019ex\u00e9cution du budget des conservateurs (loi C-10), qui imposait une r\u00e9duction des salaires d\u00e9j\u00e0 n\u00e9goci\u00e9s pour les fonctionnaires f\u00e9d\u00e9raux.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>Selon le syndicat, la loi violait les droits \u00e9nonc\u00e9s au paragraphe 2 d) de la Charte (\u00ab libert\u00e9 d\u2019association \u00bb).<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>\u00ab Nous sommes surpris de la d\u00e9cision de la Cour supr\u00eame, car elle contredit un jugement r\u00e9cent concernant le droit de n\u00e9gocier collectivement \u00bb, affirme Robyn Benson, pr\u00e9sidente nationale de l\u2019AFPC. \u00ab La loi C-10 restreignait grandement les droits de nos membres. Pourtant, en novembre 2016, la Cour a rendu une d\u00e9cision d\u00e9favorable au gouvernement de Colombie-Britannique pour avoir restreint les droits de n\u00e9gociation des enseignants de la province. \u00bb<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>Le gouvernement de la C.-B. avait supprim\u00e9 des clauses n\u00e9goci\u00e9es de la convention collective des enseignants et adopt\u00e9 une loi emp\u00eachant toute n\u00e9gociation ult\u00e9rieure sur certains points par la BC Teachers\u2019 Federation. La Cour supr\u00eame a confirm\u00e9 le jugement d\u2019un tribunal inf\u00e9rieur, qui a conclu \u00e0 l\u2019inconstitutionnalit\u00e9 de la mesure l\u00e9gislative au motif qu\u2019elle violait la libert\u00e9 d\u2019association garantie par la Charte.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>La bataille juridique de l\u2019AFPC commence en 2009<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>En 2009, l\u2019AFPC avait interjet\u00e9 appel aupr\u00e8s de la Cour sup\u00e9rieure de l\u2019Ontario apr\u00e8s l\u2019adoption de la loi C-10 par les conservateurs (Loi sur le contr\u00f4le des d\u00e9penses). La loi imposait des augmentations salariales maximum pendant quatre ans entre 2006 et 2011 et r\u00e9duisait toute augmentation n\u00e9goci\u00e9e au-del\u00e0 de celles-ci.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>La loi a eu un impact direct sur des milliers de membres, y compris ceux travaillant \u00e0 l\u2019Agence du revenu du Canada.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<p>En 2014, la Cour sup\u00e9rieure de l\u2019Ontario a statu\u00e9 que la loi ne violait pas la Charte. En 2016, la Cour d\u2019appel de l\u2019Ontario a confirm\u00e9 cette d\u00e9cision. L\u2019AFPC a ensuite d\u00e9pos\u00e9 une requ\u00eate en autorisation d\u2019appel devant la Cour supr\u00eame du Canada.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Source Source, French PSAC legal challenge against Conservative wage rollbacks ends The Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear PSAC\u2019s legal challenge to the previous Conservative government\u2019s budget bill that rolled back negotiated wage increases for federal public service workers. The union argued that the legislation violated the Charter rights of PSAC members [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-482","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=482"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":486,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482\/revisions\/486"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=482"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=482"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/00013ute.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=482"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}