Ontario Severance

Charter Rights — Ontario Employment Law

99 casesDecisions from 1983–2026

About Charter Rights

Many workers mistakenly believe that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees their absolute "free speech" or "freedom of religion" against any workplace discipline. However, a foundational principle of Canadian employment law is that Charter rights generally apply only to government actions and legislation, not private employment relationships. If you work for a private tech company or a retail chain in Ontario, workplace disputes over discrimination or suppressed speech are typically governed by the Ontario Human Rights Code or common law, rather than the constitution.

In the employment context, Charter rights most frequently surface in a few specific arenas. First, they apply directly to public sector employees, such as municipal staff, police officers, or federal Crown counsel. When legislation—such as expenditure restraint acts—attempts to unilaterally freeze salary negotiations or negate collective agreements, unions often challenge these laws as an infringement of the workers' Section 2(d) freedom of association and right to collective bargaining.

Second, Charter rights are heavily litigated during labour disputes and strikes. Striking workers assert their Section 2(b) freedom of expression when picketing an employer's facility to communicate their grievances to the public. However, Ontario courts consistently rule that these constitutional protections do not shield unlawful conduct. Actions such as physically blockading gates, creating safety hazards, or obstructing a business's operations exceed lawful picketing. Employers facing such blockades frequently seek court injunctions, forcing judges to balance the workers' freedom of expression against the employer's property rights.

Third, Charter rights become critical when challenging exclusions under provincial labour laws. When entire classes of workers—such as agricultural workers—are excluded from frameworks like the Labour Relations Act or the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), they may launch constitutional challenges to assert their rights to organize.

Finally, the Charter helps courts navigate complex relationships that intersect with fundamental freedoms. For example, in disputes involving religious institutions (such as a nun bringing a claim against a monastery), courts must carefully weigh civil employment law against the institution's Section 2(a) freedom of religion. Because determining whether government action is involved can be incredibly complex, securing guidance from a legal professional is the most effective way to ensure you are relying on the correct legal framework for your workplace dispute.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can my private employer fire me for exercising free speech?

Yes, it is possible. The Charter's protection for "freedom of expression" generally does not apply to private workplaces in Ontario. If your speech violates company policy, harms the business legally, or creates a hostile environment, an employer can typically terminate your employment, though determining if they have "just cause" depends on common law principles.

Do Charter rights protect my picket line during a strike?

Yes, peaceful picketing to communicate information is protected under your Section 2(b) right to freedom of expression. However, this right is not absolute; if picketers cross the line into blocking access to the property, trespassing, or creating safety hazards, courts can issue injunctions to stop the unlawful conduct.

If I face discrimination at an office job, is that a Charter violation?

Usually, no. Unless your employer is the government or a highly specialized public entity, private sector discrimination is not a constitutional issue. Instead, you would file a claim regarding protected grounds (like race, sex, or disability) under the Ontario Human Rights Code.

How does the Charter protect collective bargaining?

Under Section 2(d) of the Charter, workers have the freedom of association, which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include the right to engage in collective bargaining. When the government passes laws that substantially interfere with a union's ability to negotiate, those laws can be struck down as unconstitutional unless justified.

At what point should I talk to an employment lawyer about a constitutional issue at work?

You should seek legal counsel immediately if you work in the public sector and face discipline for personal expression, or if your union/association believes new government legislation unfairly strips away your rights. A lawyer can verify whether the Charter or a different provincial statute actually applies to your situation.

Can a religious organization avoid employment laws by claiming Charter rights?

Not automatically, but courts will balance the organization's Section 2(a) freedom of religion against civil employment law principles. The outcome often depends on whether the relationship is strictly spiritual or if it meets the legal definition of an employment contract under Ontario law.

Common Scenarios

  • A government worker posts a politically controversial opinion on their private social media account, and their public sector employer suspends them, triggering a Section 2(b) freedom of expression analysis.
  • During a bitter factory strike, union members form a tight barricade across the access road, preventing transport trucks from entering. The employer bypasses labour boards and goes straight to court for an injunction, arguing the blockade exceeds Charter-protected picketing.
  • A religious worker serving in a monastery is dismissed and attempts to sue for wrongful dismissal, requiring the court to untangle whether this is an employment relationship or an internal religious matter protected by the Charter.
  • The provincial government passes emergency legislation freezing wages for a specific class of public health professionals. The workers' association files a constitutional challenge arguing this arbitrary freeze violates their Section 2(d) freedom of association.

What You Should Know

  • Before alleging a violation of your constitutional rights, confirm your employer's legal status; if you are in the private sector, your remedies likely lie within the Ontario Human Rights Code or the ESA.
  • If you are participating in a lawful strike, ensure your picket line keeps moving and focuses on sharing information rather than physically obstructing property, as blockades are not protected by the Charter.
  • Public sector workers facing discipline for personal expression should save copies of the specific policies they allegedly breached and all disciplinary communications.
  • Because constitutional litigation involves strict procedural rules like serving Notices of Constitutional Question, always partner with a lawyer experienced in administrative and public law before escalating your case.

Featured Cases

P. v. Attorney General of Canada

2026 ONSC 927 (CanLII) · 2026-02-23

SAWP Class Action Certification: Charter & Unjust Enrichment

This is a certification motion under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, brought by Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) workers against the Attorney General of Canada. The court assessed whether claims regarding Charter violations (sections 7 and 15(1)) and unjust enrichment related to Employment Insurance premiums constituted tenable common issues. Certification was granted for common issues including Charter breaches and unjust enrichment, while parliamentary privilege issues regarding the admissibility of Hansard were addressed.

certification charter rights class action sawp workers unjust enrichment

Canadian Union of Postal Workers v. Canada (Attorney General)

2026 ONCA 75 (CanLII) · 2026-02-06

Postal Workers v. Canada: Back-to-Work Legislation Appeal

This is an appeal from a lower court decision regarding the constitutionality of the Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while the legislation limited the right to strike under s. 2(d) of the Charter, the limit was justified under s. 1 as a minimal impairment measure providing for interest arbitration.

back-to-work charter rights constitutional law labour relations right to strike

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Ontario (Attorney General)

2026 ONCA 74 (CanLII) · 2026-02-06

Union Strike Termination: Charter Rights Appeal

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from an application judge's decision about the constitutionality of back-to-work legislation. The parties were the Ontario Public Service Employees Union and the Government of Ontario. The application judge dismissed the union's challenge to the legislation. The Court of Appeal decided that while the legislation limited the workers' right to strike, this limit was justified to prevent harm to college students from losing their academic year. The appeal was dismissed and the union was ordered to pay $50,000 in costs.

charter rights collective bargaining constitutional law labour relations strike

Purolator Inc. v. Canadian Union of Postal Workers

2025 ONCA 565 (CanLII) · 2025-07-30

Secondary Picketing as Labour Dispute

This is a motion to quash an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's interim injunction orders regarding secondary picketing. The parties were Purolator Inc. and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, whose members picketed a Purolator facility while on strike against Canada Post. The motion judge granted an injunction under general rules, deciding that secondary picketing was not a labour dispute under section 102 of the Courts of Justice Act. The Court of Appeal determined that the broad statutory definition of a labour dispute encompasses secondary picketing, meaning section 102 governed the original injunction. As a result, the union's right to appeal directly to the Court of Appeal stands, and the employer's motion to quash the appeal was dismissed.

charter rights labour dispute labour relations secondary picketing statutory interpretation

B. v. Ontario Civilian Police Commission

2025 ONSC 488 (CanLII) · 2025-02-05

Judicial Review: Police Discipline and Charter Rights

This is a judicial review of a disciplinary decision by the Ontario Civilian Police Commission against a police officer. The Divisional Court applied the Vavilov and Doré frameworks to assess the reasonableness of the Commission's findings regarding the officer's participation in protests and the balancing of Charter rights against public interest in policing.

charter rights judicial review police discipline procedural fairness standard of review

Z.-M. v. Toronto Police Service

2025 ONSC 277 (CanLII) · 2025-01-14

Judicial Review: Police Officer Dismissal & Duty to Accommodate

This is a judicial review of a discipline hearing involving a police officer dismissed for discreditable conduct, including offensive tweets. The applicant argued the Hearing Officer breached the duty to accommodate her disability-related needs and that the dismissal violated her Charter rights to freedom of expression and equality.

charter rights duty to accommodate judicial review procedural fairness workplace discrimination

L. v. Metro Ontario Inc.

2024 ONSC 4738 (CanLII) · 2024-08-27

Judicial Review: Non-Party Intervention in Labour Dispute

This is a judicial review application concerning the proper parties to a tribunal decision involving an employer and a union. The court addressed whether non-party public bodies, such as the Integrity Commissioner and the Ontario Human Rights Commission, were necessary parties or had a duty to intervene in the reconsideration of a dismissal. The court found their inclusion frivolous under Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

charter rights frivolous claims judicial review labour relations necessary parties

Canadian Union of Postal Workers v. Canada

2024 ONSC 3787 (CanLII) · 2024-07-11

Union Challenge to Back-to-Work Legislation

This is a constitutional challenge brought by a union against back-to-work legislation (the Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act) that restricted collective bargaining and the right to strike. The court assessed whether the legislation substantially interfered with freedom of association under section 2(d) of the Charter and whether the infringement was justified under section 1. The case also addressed procedural issues regarding mootness due to the expiration of the legislation and the appropriateness of the remedies sought.

back-to-work charter rights collective bargaining constitutional challenge labour relations

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113 v. Ontario

2024 ONCA 407 (CanLII) · 2024-05-23

TTC Strike Ban: Charter Rights Appeal

This is an appeal concerning the constitutionality of the Toronto Transit Commission Labour Disputes Resolution Act, 2011, which eliminated the right to strike for TTC employees and replaced it with binding interest arbitration. The Court of Appeal for Ontario reviewed whether the Act violated section 2(d) of the Charter (freedom of association) and whether the infringement was justified under section 1.

charter rights collective bargaining constitutional challenge labour relations right to strike

Ontario (Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development) v. Cementation Canada Inc.

2024 ONCJ 246 (CanLII) · 2024-04-30

OHSA Prosecution: Charter Motion Dismissed

This is a pre-trial Charter motion in a prosecution brought by the Ministry of Labour against Cementation Canada Inc. for alleged breaches of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and mining regulations. The court dismissed the motion for a stay of proceedings, finding that the charges were sufficiently particularized and that there was no breach of the defendant's Charter rights regarding disclosure or solicitor-client privilege.

charter rights disclosure regulatory prosecutions stay of proceedings workplace health and safety

Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association v. Ontario (Attorney General)

2024 ONCA 101 (CanLII) · 2024-02-12

Bill 124 Constitutionality: Collective Bargaining Rights

This is an appeal concerning the constitutionality of the Protecting a Sustainable Public Sector for Future Generations Act, 2019 (Bill 124). The Court of Appeal for Ontario determined whether the legislation's compensation cap substantially interfered with the right to collective bargaining under section 2(d) of the Charter and whether any such infringement was justified under section 1.

charter rights collective bargaining constitutionality labour relations wage restraint

ATU Local 113 v HMQRO

2023 ONSC 3618 (CanLII) · 2023-05-08

ATU Local 113 v HMQRO: Strike Ban Unconstitutional

This is a constitutional challenge brought by a union against the Toronto Transit Commission Labour Disputes Resolution Act, 2011, which prohibited TTC employees from striking. The court found that the prohibition on the right to strike substantially interfered with meaningful collective bargaining under section 2(d) of the Charter and was not justified under section 1. Consequently, the Act was declared unconstitutional.

charter rights collective bargaining constitutional challenge labour relations right to strike

Ontario English Catholic Teachers Assoc. v. His Majesty

2022 ONSC 6658 (CanLII) · 2022-11-29

Bill 124 Unconstitutional: Collective Bargaining Rights

This is a constitutional challenge regarding the constitutionality of the Protecting a Sustainable Public Sector for Future Generations Act, 2019 (Bill 124). The court examined whether the legislation's wage cap and restrictions substantially interfered with the freedom of association and collective bargaining rights protected under section 2(d) of the Charter. The court found that Bill 124 violated section 2(d) and that this infringement could not be justified under section 1 of the Charter.

charter rights collective bargaining constitutional challenge freedom of association public sector

Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario v. York Region District School Board

2022 ONCA 476 (CanLII) · 2022-06-21

Teachers' Privacy Rights: Charter s. 8 Appeal

This is an appeal concerning workplace privacy rights of public school teachers, specifically whether a principal's access to a password-protected personal Google account breached Section 8 of the Charter. The Court of Appeal quashed the labour relations arbitrator’s decision, finding the search unreasonable and exceeding the principal's statutory authority under the Education Act. This decision was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which upheld it (York Region District School Board v. Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, 2024 SCC 22). The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that Ontario public school board teachers are protected by section 8 of the Charter in the workplace. The Court of Appeal's decision quashing the arbitrator's decision stands.

charter rights labour relations public sector search and seizure workplace privacy

H. v. Ontario

2022 ONCA 11 (CanLII) · 2022-01-12

H. v. Ontario: Workplace Harassment and Charter Claims

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision dismissing the employee's action against the Crown. The employee sued the Crown, alleging it was responsible for harassment and threats she suffered while working at a public hospital, and for the failure of various administrative tribunals to support her claims. The motion judge dismissed the action, finding that the Crown is not vicariously liable for the employment issues of public hospitals or the decisions of administrative tribunals. The Court of Appeal agreed and dismissed the appeal, concluding there was no viable cause of action pleaded against the Crown.

administrative tribunals charter rights crown liability workplace harassment

Ontario (Labour) v. Miller Group Inc.

2021 ONCA 879 (CanLII) · 2021-12-10

Ontario (Labour) v. Miller Group Inc. - Workplace Injury

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice dismissing an appeal from acquittals entered by a Justice of the Peace. The case arose from a workplace accident where a heavy roller went out of control, injuring two employees. The employer and supervisor were charged with workplace safety offences under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Justice of the Peace found a breach of s. 11(d) of the Charter regarding the Ministry's inspection of the equipment and excluded the evidence, leading to the acquittals, which the appeal judge upheld. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, finding that the lower courts erred in concluding that the defendants had a constitutional right to direct or be present during the investigation, and in granting a remedy without any evidence of prejudice.

charter rights occupational health and safety ohsa procedure workplace injury

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113 v. Toronto Transit Commission

2021 ONSC 7658 (CanLII) · 2021-11-20

Union Challenge to Vaccination Mandate: Residual Jurisdiction

This is an interlocutory proceeding concerning an application for injunctive relief by a union against an employer regarding a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy. The central legal issue is whether the court should exercise residual jurisdiction to intervene in a labour dispute where the Labour Relations Act provides an adequate remedy through grievance arbitration, or if the union's Charter rights arguments must be addressed by the arbitrator.

charter rights injunctive relief labour relations residual jurisdiction vaccination mandate

Ontario Nurses’ Association v. 10 Community Care Access Centres, 2021

2021 ONSC 5348 (CanLII) · 2021-09-21

Judicial Review: Pay Equity Maintenance Obligations

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal regarding the Ontario Nurses’ Association and 10 Community Care Access Centres. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the Pay Equity Act requires employers to negotiate pay equity maintenance with unions and whether the failure to mandate such bargaining infringes on freedom of association under the Charter. The Court found the Tribunal's interpretation of the Act to be reasonable.

charter rights judicial review labour relations pay equity statutory interpretation

D.F. v. Toronto Parking Authority

2021 ONSC 1695 (CanLII) · 2021-03-08

Workplace Sexual Assault: Labour Arbitrator Jurisdiction

This is a jurisdictional decision determining whether a unionized employee's claims for workplace sexual harassment and assault fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator under the Labour Relations Act. The court affirmed that such claims arise from the collective agreement and do not violate the Charter, finding no remedial gap in the arbitration process.

charter rights employer liability jurisdiction labour arbitration workplace harassment

Ontario (Labour) v. Cobra Float Service Inc.

2020 ONCA 527 (CanLII) · 2020-08-25

OHS Appeal: Charter s. 11(b) Jurisdiction

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a judge's decision summarily dismissing an employer's Charter application for a stay of proceedings. The employer was convicted on appeal under the Occupational Health and Safety Act following a worker's death, and subsequently brought an application under section 11(b) of the Charter for unreasonable delay. The judge dismissed the application because it was raised for the first time on appeal, and fined the employer $85,000. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the judge properly exercised his discretion not to hear a new constitutional issue without exceptional circumstances. The $85,000 fine stands.

charter rights criminal appeal occupational health and safety procedural jurisdiction workplace fatality