The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the Quebec City Pension Law

Content of the article

The Supreme Court of Canada will not hear a challenge to a Quebec law that mandated restructuring of defined benefit pension plans in the municipal sector.

A law passed in December 2014 introduced restructuring when defined benefit plans faced significant deficits. It was immediately contested by both trade unions and pensioners' associations. Unions saw this as an impediment to freedom of association, which includes the right to collective bargaining over working conditions.

Content of the article

In 2020, the Quebec Superior Court partially granted the petitions. He recognized as unconstitutional the provisions of the law regarding the suspension of pension indexation of already retired participants. However, it rejected requests to declare other provisions of the law related to activists unconstitutional.

In May 2023, the appeals court rejected the appeals. And the Supreme Court of Canada announced on Thursday that it will not accept applications for leave to appeal.

“We are happy with the victory of pensioners; We are very sorry for the activists (participants),” Roxanne L'Abbie, municipal sector co-ordinator of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, said in an interview. CUPE, affiliated with FTQ, represents the majority of unionized municipal employees in Quebec.

“This decision is the latest in a decade of protest that began with Bill 15 in 2014,” L'Abbie said.

Unions were unhappy that the law took precedence over agreements negotiated with employers.

“We have people who have consciously agreed to negotiate with their employers at that time: to lower benefits, to create a better retirement plan. Bill 15 broke those hands for us,” L'Abbie said.

The Federation of Employees and Public Service Employees CSN-affiliated (FEESP) also refers to affected municipal employees. “For CSN, any change in labor relations remains mandatory through proper negotiations between the parties. Not because employers are in short supply or financially challenged, but because it allows them to act unilaterally. We can find solutions for the parties by following the path of negotiation, not coercion,” said Caroline Senneville, president of CSN.

Share this article on social media