View cases - Stewart McKelvey

(b) Dunmore[26] This Court’s decision in Dunmore marked a new stage in the development of s. 2(d)jurisprudence in the field of labour relations. It raised the question of whether s. 2(d) requiresthe government to provide a legislative framework which enables employees to associate toobtain workplace goals in a meaningful process.2011 SCC 20 (CanLII)[27] The Ontario legislature had repealed legislation which gave farm workers a measureof protection, leaving them entirely outside the Province’s labour relations scheme. Theevidence established that attempts to organize were persistently frustrated by employers. Thefarm workers came to court seeking protection of their basic right to associate. They sought theright to organize into employee associations. For this, they contended, they needed legislationthat endorsed their constitutional right to associate and protected them from employerinterference.[28] Bastarache J., for the majority of the Court, began the analysis in Dunmore byemphasizing the need for a purposive approach to s. 2(d) — “one which aims to protect the fullrange of associational activity contemplated by the Charter and to honour Canada’s obligationsunder international human rights law” (para. 13). After a full review of the jurisprudence, hestated:. . . the activities for which the appellants seek protection [association for thepurposes of achieving workplace goals in the labour relations context] fall squarely