British Columbia Hydro & Power Authority v. Office and Technical Employees Union 378 et al.

British Columbia Hydro & Power Authority v. Office and Technical Employees Union 378 et al.
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1977-11-22
Report
[1978] 1 SCR 1015
Judges
Laskin, Bora; Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Spence, Wishart Flett; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; Pratte, Yves
On appeal from
British Columbia
Subjects
Labour law
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
British Columbia Hydro & Power Authority v. Office and Technical Employees Union 378 et al., [1978] 1 S.C.R. 1015
Date: 1977-11-22
British Columbia Hydro & Power Authority Appellant;
and
Office and Technical Employees Union 378, et al.
and
The Labour Relations Board of British Columbia and the Attorney-General of British Columbia Respondents.
1977: November 22.
Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey and Pratte JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
Labour relations—Collective bargaining—B.C. Hydro & Power Authority under duty to bargain collectively concerning pension plans—British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Act, 1964 (B.C.), c. 7, s. 55—Labour Code of British Columbia, 1973 (B.C.) (2nd Sess.), c. 122, s. 6.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia[1], allowing an appeal from a judgment of Murray J. quashing part of a decision of the Labour Relations Board. Appeal dismissed.
J.M. Giles and H. Dodd, for the appellant.
R.E. Cocking, for the respondent Unions.
J.D. McAlpine, Q.C., and J. McEwen, for the respondents, Labour Relations Board of British Columbia and Attorney-General of British Columbia.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We do not need to hear you Mr. Cocking. We are all of the opinion that the appeal fails and must be dismissed with costs to the respondent Unions only.
We hold that the Court of Appeal of British Columbia was correct in reinstating the Board’s
[Page 1016]
determination that Hydro is under a duty to bargain collectively concerning pension plans, should that matter be raised at the bargaining table by any of the Unions certified for Hydro employees.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Farris, Vaughan, Wills & Murphy, Vancouver.
Solicitors for the respondent Unions: McTaggart, Ellis & Co., Vancouver.
Solicitors for the respondents, Labour Relations Board of British Columbia and Attorney General of British Columbia: McAlpine, Roberts & Poulus, Vancouver.
[1] (1977), 77 D.L.R. (3d) 283.