Kapuskasing (Town) v. The Kapuskasing Association of Professional Fire Fighters
The collective agreement continued in effect beyond its expiry both by its own terms and by operation of FPPA s.56(1); the appellant's by-law attempting unilateral termination conflicted with FPPA s.52(3) which requires OLRB consent and was therefore of no effect under Municipal Act s.14; appeal dismissed and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C43068
- Parties
- Appellant: The Corporation of the Town of Kapuskasing; Respondent: The Kapuskasing Association of Professional Fire Fighters
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 September 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From the Divisional Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Collective Agreement Continuation, Termination of Collective Agreement, Fire Protection and Fire Prevention Act S.56(1) Freeze, Municipal by Law Invalidity, Labour Relations Board Consent S.52(3)
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Corporation of the Town of Kapuskasing
Appellant
The Kapuskasing Association of Professional Fire Fighters
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From the Divisional Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the collective agreement continued in effect beyond its expiry date
- 2 Whether the municipality could unilaterally terminate the collective agreement by by-law
- 3 Whether s.56(1) of the FPPA operated to freeze terms of the collective agreement
Ratio Decidendi
The collective agreement continued in effect beyond its expiry both by its own terms and by operation of FPPA s.56(1); the appellant's by-law attempting unilateral termination conflicted with FPPA s.52(3) which requires OLRB consent and was therefore of no effect under Municipal Act s.14; appeal dismissed and the municipality must pursue negotiation or interest arbitration to alter staffing.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Costs of the appeal and the motion for leave fixed at $20,000 inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Kapuskasing (Town) v. The Kapuskasing Association of Professional Fire Fighters Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-09-20 Docket numbers C43068 Judges Goudge, Stephen Thomas; Feldman, Kathryn N.; MacFarland, Jean Louise Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20050920 DOCKET: C43068 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF KAPUSKASING (Appellant) – and – THE KAPUSKASING ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS (Respondent) BEFORE: GOUDGE, FELDMAN AND MACFARLAND JJ.A. COUNSEL: John W. T. Judson and Leanna J. T. Simpson for the appellant Sean McManus and Jodi Hubler for the respondent HEARD: September 6, 2005 On appeal from the judgment of the Divisional Court (Justice John O’Driscoll, Justice Dennis Lane and Justice John Jennings) dated October 22, 2004. ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view both the arbitrator and the Divisional Court were correct in finding that the collective agreement continued in effect beyond its expiry date of January 31, 2002, both by its own terms and because of the “freeze” provision in s. 56(1) of the Fire Protection and Fire Prevention Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, Chap. 4 (FPPA). [2] The appellant argues that by deciding to stop having full-time firefighters and then passing a by-law effecting this and ending its collective agreement, it simply terminated its operation and therefore was entitled to annul the collective agreement. [3] In our view the facts here cannot be properly described as the appellant terminating its operation. The appellant will continue to deliver firefighting services. Indeed it is prevented by legislation from getting out of this business. It simply proposes to deliver the service by means of “volunteers” rather than full-time employees. [4] In s. 52(3) of FPPA, the legislature has prescribed the way in which the collective agreement can be terminated, namely with the consent of the Ontario Labour Relations Board on joint application of the parties. The appellant’s by-law purporting to terminate the collective agreement unilaterally is in conflict with this section and is therefore rendered of no effect by s. 14 of the Municipal Act. [5] The appellant’s recourse to extricate itself from the staffing provision of the collective agreement is either through negotiations or interest arbitration under FPPA. [6] The appeal must be dismissed. Costs of the appeal and the motion for leave fixed at $20,000 inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T. “S. T. Goudge J.A.” “K. Feldman J.A.” “J. MacFarland J.A.”