50 Mission Cap said:
Unless you're prepared to rewrite the Canadian Constitution and alter sections 91 and 92, I'd suggest that it would be impossible for the federal government to do anything.
Labour laws are the responsibility of the provinces. Hence why you can't have replacement players (or scabs) in BC and Quebec. It used to be that way in Ontario as well but was changed by the Harris government.
Legally, the federal government can't do jack.
Why do they have a Canada Labor Code that claims to apply to:
- industries of an extra-provincial or international character, such as railways, bus operations, trucking, pipelines, ferries, tunnels, bridges, canals as well as shipping and related services (e.g., longshoring);
- air transport, aircraft and airports;
- telecommunications, such as radio and television broadcasting as well as telephone and cable systems;
- banks;
- works that have been declared by Parliament to be for the general advantage of Canada or of two or more provinces, such as grain elevators or uranium mining and processing; and
- certain federal Crown corporations.
The fact is, the Federal Government is involved in labour legislation and administration. It is not exclusively in the domain of the provinces.
It seems to me that if there is to be a labour dispute here, a practical (not necessarily legal) argument might be made that two countries is enough to dispute it in rather than one country and four provinces.
Where specifically in Sections 91 & 92 does it prohibit the notion ? (ignoring the precedent with MLB which isn't likely to be but might be distinguishable). None of the provinces made a fuss when the PM was agreeable to help mediate if called upon yet all the provinces offer a provincial level of mediation (different problem but ... the practicality of the notion was apparent as opposed to a mediator for the Leafs, Habs, Canucks, etc). There is a practicality I'm curious about while fully realizing it is not something that has been discussed for some legal reasons I may well not aware of. I realize that it very likely lacks precedent and is a half baked idea.
The increasing need for improvements to the mechanisms for resolving labor disputes that cross international boundaries is presently being discussed along with the increase in globalization, free trade, etc that has brought the increased need about. In this area, there have been 15(?) work stoppages in baseball and a few in hockey. Maybe it is time to at least consider the practicalities of dealing with these disputes when they go before labor boards.
Maybe there is a legal angle a sharp lawyer could explore or the NHL/NHLPA lobbyists might interest the Federal Government in. There should be a more efficient and economical ability to address these issues in fairness to both parties involved because the present circumstances make it so prohibitive it almost robs them of their collective bargaining rights to explore it. It also seems that our constitution would be in some error if it is the statute that prohibits these parties from the ease of practical access to those rights.