Archived – Digest of Benefit Entitlement Principles Chapter 8 - Section 8
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
8.8.0 Direct interest
In order to meet the exempting conditions Footnote 1 , a claimant need only prove that he or she is not directly interested in the dispute Footnote 2 . The fact that there are other members of the same grade or class of workers as the claimant who are directly interested has no effect on a claimant's entitlement to benefits.
8.8.1 Definition of the expression directly interested
The Act does not define what is meant by this expression. There is no clear dividing line between what is direct and what is indirect, and it is not always easy to distinguish between the two.
The question does not really arise if it is clear that the claimant does not have the slightest interest in the dispute. It must be noted that the hypothetical nature of an interest does not mean no interest exists; the fact, for example, that employees are not reinstated when the dispute ends does nothing to reduce the interest they may have in the dispute Footnote 3 .
Generally an individual is directly interested when the issues in dispute relate directly to his or her own job however, this does not prevent direct interest in a dispute even when the worker's own pay or conditions of work do not form the subject matter of the dispute. That situation may occur during a labour dispute where the employer opposes one of the trade unions that represents some of the workers on a particular contentious issue. Workers who are not part of this unit and have nothing to do with and are not part of the dispute are nevertheless directly interested if the outcome will automatically be applied to them either as a collective agreement or an established industrial custom or practice. The fact that the employer may have no obligation as such to follow this practice does not matter, unless it is known that the employer will not follow it Footnote 4 . It is a pure question of facts based on the particular situation of the case under study to determine if the industrial custom or the relevant practice is well enough established Footnote 5 .
There is no direct interest if the only issue is the possibility of revising pay scales or working conditions once the dispute involving other workers has been settled, or if an individual would have enjoyed the gain from a new collective agreement had there been an application for membership in the union. The same applies even if it is possible for a worker to take advantage of a dispute in order to support his or her own wage demands. Even if the facts show that a worker really did derive the benefits from the solution to the dispute that involved another group of employees, it does not change this line of reasoning. When employees who are not involved in the dispute seek an end to the strike so that they may be reinstated, they have only an indirect interest Footnote 6 .
It is not a consideration of the end results that should decide whether a person was directly interested in a dispute. One may be directly interested in the dispute even if it is only later that some advantages will be received from the negotiations or if finally nothing was gained from it. The direct interest exists regardless of the value of the benefits at issue Footnote 7 .
The question is not whether a person wins or loses, but if the interest in the dispute is direct. The possibility of gain obviously strengthens the likelihood of direct interest in a given case. Direct interest should also be considered where the claimant shows solidarity with other workers involved in the dispute or if the claimant objects to the hiring continued employment or dismissal of other workers.
Suppose for example that a union succeeds in negotiating an agreement including rather sizeable salary increases for a particular industry. The sole possibility that another union in the same industry demands the same increases when negotiating its own agreement later on, is not sufficient grounds to conclude that the second union had a direct interest in the negotiations undertaken by the first union. The fact that a collective agreement negotiated with an employer is used as a model for other collective agreements negotiated elsewhere in the same field of activities, is not conclusive to say there is a direct interest from workers who are not directly governed by this model agreement.
It may be difficult for a person to rebut direct interest while being a member of the union that is negotiating a new collective agreement and belonging to one of the group of workers represented by this union. Direct interest is present when the terms and conditions of the claimant's employment are included in the negotiations.
Once the interest is only incidental or ancillary to the dispute, it can only be indirect. Serious consideration here must be given to the facts and circumstances, taking into account the nature of the dispute.
Finally, a complete and final severance of the employer-employee relationship may demonstrate that some workers, namely term employees, are no longer directly interested in the dispute Footnote 8 . It should be clearly established that such a severance is permanent by nature, as opposed to a temporary lay-off Footnote 9 . There are no recall rights, promise or pattern of employment that guarantees these employees will be rehired once the dispute is settled.
8.8.2 Ratification of collective agreement
More often than not, a dispute between a union and the employer relates to the ratification of a collective agreement. To decide whether a person has direct interest, one only has to ask whether that person's employment will be governed by the agreement in dispute.
If it is, the direct interest is obvious. The person's own working conditions are under negotiation and may be directly changed by the outcome of the dispute. This has been held when the dispute dealt with such matters as wages, a retroactive increase, hours of work, overtime, job classification, vacation, seniority, job security, grievance procedure, travel allowances, union security, elimination of positions, fringe benefits and the duration of the collective agreement Footnote 10 .
A dispute over whether a person's job should be included in the collective agreement gives that person a direct interest. It is immaterial whether an individual favours or opposes the proposals that have been made or whether the worker is on leave at the time of the dispute Footnote 11 . But even where both the employer and the union sought to include janitors in the collective agreement, it was held that they did not have a direct interest in the dispute because they had exercised their rights and refused all efforts to include them in the negotiations Footnote 12 .
A direct interest exists even when only some of the claimant's working conditions are governed by the collective agreement. Similarly, to be directly interested, it is not necessary that the person be concerned with the central issues of the dispute. The issues applicable to the claimant may be of secondary importance or may have even been settled. It is sufficient that any working condition related to the employee's own employment be covered under the collective agreement in dispute.
It may happen, in certain exceptional situations, that the workers whose working conditions are not governed by the collective agreement in dispute are nevertheless directly interested Footnote 13 . In one case, a claimant whose job was covered by the collective agreement even though he was a co-owner of the business was held not to be directly interested, given that he behaved more as an employer.
When the wages of an employee are partially based on the rate paid to other employees whose collective agreement is in dispute, the interest is indirect. The same is true when the employer has no obligation to maintain relative parity between the employment conditions of workers covered by the collective agreement and those who are not; however, it may happen, in certain exceptional situations, that these groups of workers would both be directly interested Footnote 14 .
A collective agreement is not strictly limited to a single place of employment. It is possible that employees at different places of employment working for the same employer are subject to the terms and conditions of a single collective agreement, and this may lead to a single dispute involving employees at these various places of employment. In such circumstances, an employer may decide, for one reason or another, to definitively stop all operations at one of these premises. This is normally enough to deprive those workers at the closed premises of any possibility of returning to work there, and they consequently have no further interest in the dispute Footnote 15 . The same conclusion cannot be reached when the workers are still entitled, for example because of seniority rights, to be recalled at other premises involved in the dispute and which will undoubtedly reopen once it is settled.
8.8.3 Several labour agreements in dispute
The fact that several collective agreements are being negotiated separately generally indicates the possibility of several labour disputes, unless some common denominator binds them into a single more complex dispute. This single dispute may take place at one or several different places of employment Footnote 16 .
Whether one or several disputes are underway, if the worker's employment is governed by one of the collective agreements in dispute, then the interest is direct Footnote 17 .
Where the stoppage of work is due to a single isolated dispute, that particular dispute must be identified. The claimant's direct interest will be examined solely in relation to the dispute that has caused the stoppage of work leading to the loss of employment Footnote 18 .
8.8.4 Working conditions governed by legislation
Having recourse to legislation to determine working conditions in some sectors is particularly common in Quebec. The Collective Agreement Decrees Act allows associations of workers or employers in a given sector with negotiated collective agreements to ask the Minister of Labour to extend some conditions included in these agreements to all employees in the designated sector of a specific region or throughout the province.
Thousands of workers are thus subject to such decrees, and joint committees composed of union and management representatives of the designated sectors have the responsibility for applying and enforcing these decrees: more than 40 throughout Quebec in five major areas of activity, namely hairdressing, garages, industries, services and garment.
The Quebec construction industry has its own decree, promulgated by the government following to each round of negotiations Footnote 19 , which applies the collective agreement reached between the major employer and employee associations to the industry as a whole. Upon the Minister of Labour's recommendation, the government may also prolong, change or repeal a decree, without the consent of the parties, if it is in the public interest and appears to be the only way to avoid a dispute. It should be added that unionization is mandatory in this industry.
Obviously all workers in such a sector are directly involved in a dispute when working conditions, once negotiated, are to be subject to a general decree Footnote 20 . But the mere possibility of this is not sufficient Footnote 21 .
The direct interest need not be immediate. The working conditions may be affected only from a set date in the future Footnote 22 , and even this date could be a contentious issue.
8.8.5 Application or interpretation of a clause
The fact that a collective agreement is in force does not mean there cannot be any dispute in the business or firm. The interpretation or application of a specific clause in the collective agreement may be the source of a dispute. Not all members of the bargaining unit are necessarily directly interested in such a dispute, but only those workers whose employment is affected by the clause.
This principle was applied with respect to contract miners who requested that car pushers be provided to them, to weavers in a dispute about a bonus plan, to railway workers alternating between two jobs and to several dressmakers who were dissatisfied with the piece rate for a particular operation Footnote 23 .
If the clause in question concerns all employees governed by the collective agreement, then all of them are directly interested Footnote 24 . This was held in a dispute about a general increase or decrease of wages, calculation of wages, night shift premium, and grievance procedure and seniority rights.
8.8.6 Dispute over union affiliation
When a dispute arises over union certification or affiliation all workers whose employment will be governed by a collective agreement are directly interested. It matters not that an individual is in favour of or against the recognition of the union.
With respect to jurisdictional disputes between unions, members of both unions are directly interested.
8.8.7 Employment or dismissal of certain employees
With respect to disputes connected with the employment or dismissal of certain employees, any person who insists upon or resists the dismissal or reinstatement of such employees is directly interested. Employees whose very employment is in dispute are, of course, directly interested.
Similarly, where the union challenges the hiring of non-union workers, not only the union members but also the non-union workers whose employment is at issue are directly interested.
8.8.8 Policy of union solidarity
Mere agreement with the principle of union solidarity towards strikers, or mere membership in a union, does not in itself constitute direct interest.
However, during a dispute occurring at another place of employment or involving another employer, a union may encourage solidarity with the striking workers and adopt a resolution to that effect. This situation may degenerate into what is called a solidarity strike Footnote 25 . Some union members may eventually be expected to make concrete acts of solidarity under the policy, for example by refusing to handle "hot" materials, or by delaying the signing of their own collective agreement until the others win their demands.
Employees who, because of their duties, may be required to decide whether or not they will act in sympathy are obviously directly interested. Even the other members, who, by reason of the nature of their employment, will not have such an opportunity, are still directly interested as union members.
8.8.9 Rebuttal of direct interest
A total break in the employer-employee relationship during a stoppage of work Footnote 26 generally shows that the claimant no longer has any interest in the dispute.
A person's direct interest is not rebutted when termination of employment is not definitive Footnote 27 , the elimination of the worker's job is one of the issues in dispute, the settlement of the dispute or the resumption of activities involves the claimant's reintegration Footnote 28 or when, the claimant actually returns to work once the dispute is settled Footnote 29 . The same is true in a large-scale dispute going well beyond the context of negotiation with a single employer and affecting an entire sector or area of activities, such as the Quebec construction industry. Then even if the worker's resignation was submitted to the employer during a stoppage of work, that worker is not necessarily leaving the sector of activities affected by the dispute. The interest in the dispute thus continues to be direct Footnote 30 .
8.8.10 Non-union workers
Collective agreements generally govern employment conditions of even some non-union workers. Just because an employee does not belong to the striking union does not necessarily prevent concluding that the worker is directly interested. Willingly or not, even a non-union member or a member of another union may be directly interested, in so far as the benefits of the new collective agreement will apply, amongst others, to this person as well Footnote 31 .
Non-union workers are often temporary, casual, substitute or probationary workers, but the employee status is not a determining factor Footnote 32 . It is up to the individual employee to produce evidence that can be used as rebuttal of direct interest.
8.8.11 Duration of direct interest
As already noted, the question of direct interest must be examined in terms of the dispute and the stoppage of work which caused the claimant to lose an employment or to be unable to resume a previous employment Footnote 33 , and not with respect to a later dispute that happens subsequent to this loss of employment. A worker may also show that all interest in the dispute has been lost and no longer exists Footnote 34 . It is thus clear that a person may be directly interested in a dispute for a certain period of time, yet have no further interest during another period of time.
Clearly, the exempting conditions are not met so long as the claimant has a direct interest. Disentitlement will not apply if it is established that the claimant does not have a direct interest in the dispute, assuming of course that the other exempting conditions are met as well Footnote 35 .
Report a problem or mistake on this page
- Date modified: