SPEAKING UP IN SUPPORT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
YOUR RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES BY LISA MASTROBUONO
“THE DUTY OF LOYALTY OWED TO AN EMPLOYER DOES NOT REQUIRE ABSOLUTE SILENCE FROM EDUCATORS WORKING IN PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARDS. LIKE OTHER UNIONIZED WORKERS, ETFO MEMBERS HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION UNDER THE CHARTER WHEN THEY SHARE THEIR OPINIONS ABOUT ISSUES LIKE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.”
around education-related issues. Alarmed at the impact of education funding cuts, many members believe they have a professional responsibility to voice their concerns to par- ents and community members in an effort to protect Ontario’s internationally-recognized public education system. Many ETFO members will continue to
A 22 ETFO VOICE | FALL 2019
engage directly with parents and community members in support of negotiations as we enter the 2019 round of collective bargain- ing. Members should be aware that when it comes to speaking out publicly about bar- gaining-related issues, the courts are gener- ally on their side.
UNION MEMBERS’ FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION UNDER THE CHARTER
In common-law, employees have certain legal obligations to their employer. They include acting in their employer’s best interests, not competing with their employer’s business in- terests and refraining from publicly criticis-
positive outcome of the cur- rent provincial government’s first year in office has been increased public engage- ment by ETFO members
ing the employer. These types of obligations are defined by a legal term called the “duty of loyalty.” However, in Canada the law also places
significant limitations on the nature of that duty to loyalty. This is particularly true in the public sector, where employers like school boards are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its guarantee of freedom of expression. The duty of loyalty owed to an employer
does not require absolute silence from edu- cators working in public school boards. Like other unionized workers, ETFO members have a substantial right to freedom of ex- pression under the Charter when they share their opinions about issues like collective bargaining. In addition, arbitrators, labour boards and the courts have supported educa- tors’ rights under the Charter to express their views on matters such as education funding and class size, absent evidence of harm to students or to the education system in gen- eral. This means a school board directive that prohibited educators from expressing their views on any matters relevant to the work- place would likely be found to be in violation of the Charter.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
