L. v. O.P.S.E.U. (Ont.C.A.)
L. v. O.P.S.E.U.: Charter and Union Dues
Summary
This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario concerning the applicability of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to a private union's use of mandatory dues under a collective agreement with a Crown agency. The court addressed whether the Rand formula and statutory provisions regarding strikes violated the employee's freedom of association, expression, and equality rights, ultimately finding no breach of the Charter. This decision was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which upheld it (L. v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, [1991] 2 SCR 211). The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the expenditure of mandatory union dues by the Union on causes unrelated to collective bargaining does not violate the appellant's rights under the Charter (either because it is justified under section 1 or does not infringe the rights). The mandatory check-off clause remains valid and the appellant is required to continue paying dues without restriction on their use by the Union.
Key Factors
- Charter applicability
- Union dues
- Freedom of association
- Freedom of expression
- Collective agreement
Related Cases
United Steelworkers v. Greenfirst Forest Products
2026 ONSC 4599 (CanLII) · 2026-08-19Judicial Review of Labour Arbitration: Overtime Dispute
This is a judicial review of a labour arbitration award concerning the distribution of weekend overtime under a collective agreement. The Divisional Court applied the Vavilov reasonableness framework and found the arbitrator's decision unreasonable for failing to address the Letter of Understanding and the central issue of student overtime compensation. The court set aside the award and remitted the matter to a different arbitrator for reconsideration.
B. v. Public Service Alliance Of Canada et al
2026 ONSC 4761 (CanLII) · 2026-08-17This is an interlocutory proceeding addressing subject matter jurisdiction in a labour relations dispute. The court dismissed the action, finding that the Labour Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the union's internal disciplinary process and allegations of procedural unfairness under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.
OPSEU v. The Crown
2026 ONSC 3926 (CanLII) · 2026-08-13Judicial Review of Labour Arbitrator: OHSA and Estoppel
This is a judicial review application brought by the union challenging a labour arbitrator's decision regarding grievance arbitration and occupational health and safety obligations. The Divisional Court reviewed the application, finding that the arbitrator's application of issue estoppel and balancing of finality and fairness was reasonable and that no distinct contractual obligation existed beyond the OHSA duties.
B. v. York Region District School Board
2026 ONSC 4153 (CanLII) · 2026-07-27Weber Exclusive Jurisdiction in School Board Harassment
This is a judicial review proceeding where the Divisional Court reviewed an application challenging the School Board's handling of a workplace harassment investigation. The court determined that the dispute arose from the interpretation and application of the collective agreement, granting exclusive jurisdiction to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under the Weber principle, thereby barring the court from hearing the matter.
Purolator Inc. v. Canadian Union of Postal Workers
2026 ONCA 515 (CanLII) · 2026-07-14Labour Dispute Injunction: CUPW v. Purolator Appeal
This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision granting an injunction against picketing. The employer, Purolator, obtained a court order without notice to stop the Canadian Union of Postal Workers from picketing outside its facilities during a strike against Canada Post. The motion judge decided that the strict notice rules for labour disputes did not apply because Purolator was not directly involved in the union's dispute with Canada Post. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the injunction. The Court ruled that the picketing was connected to a labour dispute because Canada Post owns most of Purolator, meaning the employer was legally required to give notice before getting the injunction.
More Ontario employment decisions from the 1980s
This summary was written by AI from the published decision and its headnote. It is not an official version of the decision; read the full text on CanLII before relying on it. This is legal information, not legal advice. Ontario Severance is an educational tool. If you are facing a serious employment law matter, consult with a qualified employment lawyer in Ontario.