Mounted Police Association of Ontario v Canada (Attorney General)

MPAO struck legislation excluding RCMP members from federal labour-relations protections and imposing a non-unionised representation regime. The SCC held that s.2(d) protects employees' freedom to choose their own collective representative free from management influence.

RCMP members were excluded from the Public Service Labour Relations Act. They were instead represented through a Staff Relations Representative Programme — management-influenced and non-independent.

Does s.2(d) protect collective bargaining and free choice of representative?

Yes. Legislation struck (with one-year suspension).

Section 2(d) protects the freedom to engage in meaningful collective bargaining. This includes (a) collective representation, (b) independence from management, and (c) processes that promote meaningful collective influence on employment terms.

McLachlin CJ and LeBel J held that the SRRP did not provide the independence required for meaningful collective representation. The 1987 Labour Trilogy's narrow s.2(d) reading no longer governs. Saskatchewan Federation of Labour (decided the same day) confirmed the right to strike.

Together with Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, MPAO defines the constitutional architecture of Canadian labour relations. The 1987 trilogy is dead.

Mounted Police Association of Ontario v Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 1, [2015] 1 SCR 3.

McLachlin CJ, LeBel J, Abella J, Rothstein J, Cromwell J, Moldaver J, Karakatsanis J, Wagner J