View cases - Stewart McKelvey

agricultural workers. However, on the record before us, it has not been established that theregime utilizes unfair stereotypes or perpetuates existing prejudice and disadvantage. Until theregime established by the AEPA is tested, it cannot be known whether it inappropriatelydisadvantages farm workers. The claim is premature.V. Conclusion2011 SCC 20 (CanLII)[117] The decision that we render today is another step in the resolution of the issuessurrounding the organizational challenges faced by farm workers in Ontario. We hope that allconcerned proceed on the basis that s. 2(d) of the Charter confirms a right to collectivebargaining, defined as “a process of collective action to achieve workplace goals”, requiringengagement by both parties. Like all Charter rights, this right must be interpreted generouslyand purposively. The bottom line may be simply stated: Farm workers in Ontario are entitled tomeaningful processes by which they can pursue workplace goals.[118] We would allow the appeal and dismiss the action. We would answer theconstitutional questions as follows:1. Does the Agricultural Employees Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 16, infringe s. 2(d)of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?No.2. If so, is the infringement a reasonable limit prescribed by law as can be demonstrablyjustified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights andFreedoms?It is not necessary to answer this question.