Article content continued
While Unifor didn’t agree its members used wrongful tactics like intimidation, CCRL claims the union did — thereby moving beyond what are permissible boundaries to picketing activity.
“It must not amount to unlawful, tortious or criminal activity,” Wildeman argued. “And in the context of an application for an injunction to restrain union activity which blocks or restricts access to the employer’s property, we do see that there are cases where the courts will order a complete prohibition on blocking access to the employer’s premises.”
The CCRL argued McMurtry’s decision adequately took union members’ Charter rights into account and that Unifor is now asking the appeal court to adjust the line too far in the union’s favour.
And while union members have a right to state their message, the CCRL argued members cannot force people to listen or engage.
Due to COVID-19 concerns, the matter was heard via video. Justices Georgina Jackson, Ralph Ottenbreit and Jeff Kalmakoff reserved decision.
hpolischuk@postmedia.com
twitter.com/LPHeatherP
tinyurlis.gdv.gdv.htu.nuclck.ruulvis.netshrtco.de
مقالات مشابه
- صربستان ممنوعیت تجمع جرم پس از ویروس مستند تظاهرات
- مبل شویی - مبل شویی اسلامشهر
- UMass Lowell researcher looks to the extreme
- سریع ترین راه های طلاق
- Eovaldi shuts down Marlins in 5-3 victory
- شرکت صادرات و واردات کالاهای مختلف از جمله کاشی و سرامیک و ارائه دهنده خدمات ترانزیت و بارگیری دریایی و ریلی و ترخیص کالا برای کشورهای مختلف از جمله روسیه و کشورهای حوزه cis و سایر نقاط جهان - بازرگانی علی قانعی
- 'تنبل تفکر مشکل:' U R استاد مطالعه, چرا مردم دروغ
- آخرین: هوستون افزایش ممیزی از اسلحه تیزر بدن, دوربین
- علوم و تجهیزات آزمایشگاهی - مجله بیوشیمی ویزارد
- باربری - گیسو بار