Arbitration Awards — Ontario Employment Law
Related Keywords
About Arbitration Awards
In Ontario employment and labour law, an arbitration award is the final, legally binding written decision rendered by an arbitrator or arbitration board after a workplace dispute has been heard. While the arbitration process serves as a private alternative to the public court system, the resulting award carries the same legal weight as a judge's ruling. This topic focuses specifically on the enforcement, finality, and limited avenues for challenging these decisions once they are issued.
In unionized workplaces governed by Ontario's Labour Relations Act, 1995 (LRA), grievance arbitration awards dictate outcomes regarding collective agreement interpretations, unjust dismissals, and union dues. Once an arbitrator renders an award, the LRA strictly mandates that it is "final and binding" on the employer, the union, and the affected employees. A unique feature of Ontario labour law is that these obligations can even attach to the purchaser of a unionized business under the LRA's successor rights provisions, meaning a new owner may find themselves liable for a prior owner's unpaid arbitration awards.
For non-unionized employees—usually senior executives or workers with mandatory arbitration clauses in their employment contracts—arbitration awards are governed by the Arbitration Act, 1991. Like labour awards, these decisions are designed to be conclusive.
If a party ignores an arbitration award—for example, an employer refusing to pay a mandated severance amount or failing to remit unpaid health premiums—the successful party does not need to start a new trial. Instead, the award can be filed directly with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Once filed, it acts as an enforceable court order, allowing for mechanisms like asset seizure, wage garnishment, or even contempt of court proceedings against non-compliant corporate officers.
Overturning an arbitration award is extremely difficult. Disagreeing with the outcome is not enough. Parties must seek a "judicial review" through the Divisional Court, where judges apply a high level of deference to the arbitrator. Unless the decision is deemed legally "unreasonable" or there was a severe breach of procedural fairness (natural justice), the court will not intervene. Because enforcing complex orders, establishing legal standing, or navigating the rigid grounds for judicial review involves highly specialized procedural thresholds, assessing the viability of challenging or enforcing an award makes targeted consultation with a qualified legal professional crucial.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if my employer refuses to pay the money ordered in an arbitration award?
If an employer ignores a monetary arbitration award, you or your union can file a certified copy of the decision with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Once registered, it inherits the same enforceable status as a court judgment, allowing for collection actions like garnishment or property liens.
Can I appeal an arbitrator's decision if I think they got the facts wrong?
Generally, no. In Ontario, arbitration awards are legally binding and cannot be appealed simply because you disagree with the factual findings. You can only challenge the decision through a process called "judicial review" if you can prove the arbitrator made a fundamentally unreasonable legal error or denied you a fair hearing.
Is there a deadline to challenge an arbitration award in Ontario?
Yes. If an authorized party wishes to seek judicial review of an Ontario arbitration award, the application must normally be brought within 30 days of the decision being issued. Missing this strict limitation period typically strips you of any right to challenge the award.
If my company is bought out, does the new owner have to honour past union arbitration awards?
Yes, under Section 55 of the Labour Relations Act, a purchaser who acquires a unionized business generally inherits the seller’s collective agreement obligations. This typically makes the new employer legally liable for complying with past, unresolved arbitration awards issued against the previous owner.
As an individual union member, can I personally take an arbitration award to court for judicial review?
Usually, individual union members do not have the legal "standing" to launch a judicial review on their own because the union legally owns the grievance process. You generally must rely on your union to challenge the award, unless the dispute directly concerns a breach of the union's duty of fair representation.
When should I consult a lawyer after receiving an unfavorable arbitration award?
You should speak to a customized labour or employment litigator immediately upon receiving the decision if you suspect severe procedural bias or legal errors, as the 30-day window to file for judicial review requires rapid, specialized legal analysis of the arbitrator's administrative reasoning.
Common Scenarios
- A union successfully secures an arbitration award ordering a company to reinstate a wrongfully dismissed worker, but the employer stubbornly refuses to allow the employee back on site, leading the union to seek a court order enforcing the reinstatement under threat of contempt.
- A senior executive with a confidential arbitration clause in their contract receives an award confirming their right to an unpaid bonus and registers the award with the Superior Court to legally pressure the non-paying company.
- A university professor denied tenure challenges an arbitration board's award, bringing a judicial review application arguing the board interpreted the collective agreement's evaluation criteria in a completely unreasonable manner that defied logic.
- A manufacturing plant is sold midway through an enforcement battle, and the union targets the new corporate purchaser to collect thousands in unpaid health and dental premiums dictated by a previous arbitration award.
What You Should Know
- Understand the deferential standard of review: before spending money trying to overturn an award in court, recognize that judges will not re-weigh the evidence and will only intervene if the arbitrator's conclusion is fundamentally flawed or irrational.
- Act immediately on the 30-day timeline if you intend to pursue a judicial review of an award; courts are incredibly reluctant to grant time extensions in labour relations contexts.
- If you face an uncooperative opposing party after winning an arbitration, do not waste time arguing; formally file the award with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to unlock robust enforcement tools.
- If you are reviewing an award as a unionized employee facing termination, verify whether the union intends to challenge the decision on your behalf, as you likely lack the independent legal standing to do so yourself.
- Due to the specialized nature of administrative law and the difficulty of proving an award is 'unreasonable,' engaging a lawyer who focuses specifically on appellate or judicial review proceedings is a vital strategic step.
Featured Cases
Yee v. Trent University
2010 ONSC 3307 (CanLII) · 2010-06-08Judicial Review of Arbitration Award: Union Representation and Standing
A tenure application was denied, and the applicant sought judicial review of an arbitration award. The court considered the standing of the applicant and the union, the role of the union in the grievance process, and the interpretation of collective agreement provisions regarding individual grievances and arbitration rights.
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Rainy Lake Hotel
2005 CanLII 34817 (ON SC) · 2005-09-16Collective Agreement Contempt: Enforcement of Arbitration Awards
A contempt proceeding involving a failure to comply with arbitration awards and court orders related to union dues and health/dental premiums under a collective agreement. The court considers whether corporate officers can be held in contempt for non-compliance and whether non-monetary arbitration awards can be enforced through contempt proceedings.
Re Windsor Western Hospital Centre Inc. and Mordowanec et al.
1986 CanLII 2635 (ON SC) · 1986-08-05Labour Relations Act: OLRB Jurisdiction and Union Duty of Representation
A labour and employment case involving disputes over the Ontario Labour Relations Board's (OLRB) jurisdiction to order a recommencement of arbitration after a final and binding award, as well as allegations of union breach of duty of fair representation and employer interference with union rights.
Re United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 3054 and Cassin-Remco Ltd. et al.
1979 CanLII 2013 (ON SC) · 1979-11-06Successor Employer Liability and Collective Agreement Arbitration Awards
A labour relations case addressing whether a purchaser of a business is liable for arbitration awards made under the seller’s collective agreement, as per section 55 of the Labour Relations Act. The union seeks to enforce these awards against the purchaser, raising questions about statutory interpretation and the enforceability of arbitration awards under the Labour Relations Act.
Re International Chemical Workers Union, Local 817 and Somerville Industries Ltd.
1979 CanLII 1883 (ON SC) · 1979-03-14Collective Agreement Dispute: Probationary Employee Termination and Recall Rights
A labour and employment case involving the interpretation of a collective agreement regarding the termination of probationary employees during lay-off and the employer's recall rights. The court upheld the employer's action as within the collective agreement and affirmed the arbitration board's jurisdiction to interpret the agreement's provisions.
Re International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America et al. and Massey-Ferguson Industries Ltd. et al.
1979 CanLII 1802 (ON SC) · 1979-02-01Interpretation of 'Must' in Collective Agreement: Judicial Review of Arbitration Award
A judicial review case concerning the interpretation of the word 'must' in a collective agreement's disciplinary clause. The court examined whether 'must' imposes a mandatory obligation or is merely directory, and whether the arbitrator's interpretation was reasonable.
Re Service Employees Union Local 246 and Heritage Nursing Home Ltd.
1977 CanLII 1048 (ON SC) · 1977-11-22Workplace Discrimination: Arbitration Award Quashed for Bias Against Immigrant Grievors
A judicial review of an arbitration award in a workplace grievance case, where the arbitration board's decision was quashed due to inappropriate language suggesting immigrant grievors may not understand the importance of truth under oath, raising concerns of bias and equality violations.
Re International Woodworkers of America and Patchogue Plymouth, Hawkesbury Mills
1976 CanLII 625 (ON SC) · 1976-10-29Arbitration Award Enforcement and Judicial Review Stay
A case concerning the enforcement of an arbitration award reinstating an employee with full pay, pending judicial review. The court addressed whether arbitration awards are automatically stayed by judicial review applications and whether sequestration or fines should be imposed on an employer refusing to implement the award.
Re Metropolitan Toronto Board of Commissioners of Police and Metropolitan Toronto Police Association
1974 CanLII 702 (ON SC) · 1974-09-19Labour and Employment: Arbitration Award on Two-Man Patrol Cars
A labour and employment case involving the interpretation of 'working conditions' under the Police Act and the validity of an arbitration award requiring two-man patrol cars. The court held that 'working conditions' includes this requirement and that the seven-month implementation timeline was unreasonable, but dismissed the application to quash the award due to no jurisdictional error.
Re Higgins et al. and Bord of Governors of the Riverdale Hosipital
1971 CanLII 1112 (ON SC) · 1971-03-08Labour and Employment: Retroactive Wage Increase Dispute in Collective Agreement
A labour and employment case involving the interpretation of a collective agreement and the retroactive application of wage increases to former employees. The dispute concerns whether an arbitration board exceeded its jurisdiction by inconsistently interpreting the collective agreement and whether extrinsic evidence can resolve ambiguities in the agreement's terms.
Tyrrell v. Consumers' Gas Co.
1963 CanLII 192 (ON SC) · 1963-10-10Enforcing Arbitration Awards: Labour Relations Act and Injunctions
A labour and employment case involving a union seeking an injunction to enforce an arbitration award under section 34(9) of the Labour Relations Act. The court ruled that statutory remedies provided under the Act are sufficient and that injunctions are not granted when alternative remedies exist. The employer's conduct was also assessed for contempt of arbitration award, but the motion was dismissed.