Gateway to Canada: Roxham Road By: Nicolas Di Nardo Desperate migrants are still making a run for it to Canada’s border. Since Trump took over the highest office, a tiny dead end on Roxham Road looks to have become the favourite non-official border crossing for tons of people looking for refuge. On Sunday alone, approximately 400 people crossed over the border using Roxham Road, according to U.S. and Canadian officials. Every person to cross at Roxham Road, enters Canada with the hope that it will be the answer to their problems, most of which stem from the current political climate in the United States. What they probably don’t expect, is to be greeted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers with handcuffs, ready to arrest them. However, they are only cuffed for a moment, now that Canadian police have set up a reception centre in the Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle area of Quebec, so that migrants can be processed, given food, and assistance to help prepare their applications for refuge. They even have shuttle busses ready to transport everyone, and will soon be adding electricity and portable toilets. Just this week, they have also started to add tents to accommodate more people, and are looking to add lighting and heat. Interestingly enough, even though these migrants are entering Canada at an unofficial location (not a legal port of entry), they are legally allowed to request refugee status as a result. A little quirk in the application of the law has caused this, but whoever was the first to come to this realization, using Roxham Road as an entry point, had to have done some research beforehand. If they were to try to enter Canada from the U.S. using a port of entry, they would have been denied entry and told to apply for refugee status in the U.S. as a result. The law, under the 2002 Safe Country Agreement between Canada and the U.S. states that if migrants are seeking asylum, they must apply to the first country they arrive in. Since people are entering Canada through a non-official point of entry, they are not being denied or told to turn back, instead, they are given the opportunity to apply for refugee status. Many Migrants have decided to seek refuge in Canada because of Trump’s bans and clear dislike of majority-Muslim countries, because they do not see the U.S. as they used to, as a safe haven. Instead, Canada has now become their idea of a safe haven. Taking a chance and staying in the U.S. with the risk of being sent back to their respective countries was not attractive for many, and the risk they took to get to Canada and cross the border was and is a better option. A number of migrants have said that they are seeking a better life, and if they are forced to go back, they will be in more trouble than they are currently. With the increase in numbers of people entering Canada, last week it was announced that shelter will be available in Montreal’s Olympic Stadium, however, if people would like to go on their own and seek their own housing, they are welcome to do so. If they require assistance, they are also able to reach out to the government. For now, until their applications are processed and approved, they are free to live in Canada and do what they choose. If you have any questions regarding requirements needed for asylum, citizenship, or general immigration inquires please contact our Toronto Immigration Lawyers, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, ImmigrationAugust 10, 2017June 19, 2020
Minister of Justice Suggests Lowering The Legal Alcohol Limit By: Nicolas Di Nardo The days of romantic dates could potentially disappear if the Federal government decides to reduce the legal alcohol limit for licensed drivers. Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould has suggested lowering the limit to 50 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood from the current 80 milligrams. Last May, Wilson-Raybould sent a letter to provincial and territorial justice ministers suggesting this, as she believes that it will “better respond to the danger posed by impaired drivers,” however, others disagree. François Meunier, a spokesperson for Quebec’s restaurant lobby has said that, “the (change would) mean a woman can have one drink and a man, in most cases, two,” so forget about ordering a bottle of wine with dinner, that won’t fly anymore. Meunier also notes it won’t only be a problem for couples trying to enjoy a night out, but restaurants will also suffer. He stresses that owners are not worried about losing alcohol sales, but food sales that go along with the alcohol, and their total revenue are of their main concern. He also notes it is likely that, “when it comes to celebrations, parties, all that will be done at home as people change their behaviour…people will choose to stay home.” Wilson-Raybould responded to reactions over her letter, stating that the current rules were established after an abundance of research, and with more recent research already conducted, it indicated that the “data underestimated the fatal crash risk,” and outlined that the risk of getting into a car accident is actually: Almost double at 50mg Almost triple at 80mg Wilson-Raybould also mentioned in her letter a case study that looked into the dissuasive effect a reduction in blood/alcohol limit levels can have, citing Ireland. She wrote, “the reduction to 50 milligrams of alcohol, combined with obligatory testing for alcohol, produced a 50 per cent reduction in deadly road accidents… and a reduction of about 65 per cent in the number of (criminal) charges.” With Bill C-46, it allows police to demand drivers submit to a breathalyzer even if they don’t suspect they are under the influence. This, in tandem with the proposed lowered alcohol limit, could prove to be very effective. However, bar and restaurant owners still do not approve. They believe that the government should focus on stopping repeat drunk drivers, not penalizing responsible ones. Other opinions address Trudeau and the legalization of marijuana, how he “wants to get everyone high”, but also prevent them from drinking. “It’s a double standard,” says Peter Sergakis, head of an association representing bar owners, “where is the logic?” The timing could not be worse to introduce this measure, seeing as provinces are preparing for the marijuana legalization bill to become law in 2018. Trying to juggle both at once may be too big of a pill for the government to swallow. At Devry Smith Frank LLP we have experienced lawyers in all areas of law. If you are looking for a lawyer or have general questions, please feel free to contact one of our lawyers today, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlogAugust 9, 2017June 22, 2020
Toronto Man Subjected To ‘Cruel and Unusual’ Punishment While Detained By Brantford Police By: Nicolas Di Nardo, Junior Marketing & Administrator Treatment of prisoners is a big issue that for the most part, goes unseen by many all over the world. Many countries are full of corrupt law enforcement officers, horrible prison conditions, or do not follow the basic rights that are to be given to prisoners. However, you’d never suspect that a prisoner in Canada would go through and type of ‘cruel and unusual’ treatment that we hear about on the news. Unfortunately, it still does happen in our own backyard. Philip Alafe didn’t expect something like this to happen in Canada either, especially to him. Alafe, 27, is from Nigeria and is currently applying for refugee status. He was arrested back in July 2015 for dangerous driving, and assault with a weapon for driving dangerously at others. Upon his arrest, he disclosed his mental health issues – depression and anxiety – along with his disease, sick cell anemia, which without medication he can be left in an abundance of pain. In addition, he told Brantford Police Officer Staff Sgt. Cheney Venn that he was not suicidal in any way. Alafe and Venn arrived at the Police station at 6:50pm, at which time Alafe disclosed the above information before being placed in a cell. There, he began to have one of the worst nights of his life. Alafe described his whole night, stating that they treated him “worse than an animal…[he was] stripped of everything… [he] just didn’t want to live anymore… [he] thought he was going to be in that situation forever.” Philip’s night in the station was broken down into events: 11:21 p.m. Alafe spends 15 minutes asking for medication and throws wet toilet paper Venn threatens a “very frigging cold night” if Alafe continues to throw toilet paper 11:48 p.m. Alafe continue to throw toilet paper Venn takes his blanket and mattress away and provides Alafe with one pill 1:10 a.m. Philip ties his jumpsuit to the cell bars Venn threatens to take it if it is not taken down 2:50 a.m. Over this time, Alafe asks for his blanket back and ties his t-shirt to the bars, which Venn takes 3:01 a.m. Philip tries to get a piece of paper with his jumpsuit Jumpsuit is taken by Venn 3:03 a.m. From this point on, Alafe now spends his time in the cell naked, until 7:30 a.m. At 6 a.m. he tries to tie his socks into a noose, which an officer takes from him 7:30 a.m. Other officers return Alafe’s jumpsuit, mattress, and blanket After having gone through this night in the Brantford Police station and bringing this matter to court, Alafe said that without the video footage no one would have believed him when describing the events that took place. The footage displayed the “cruel and unusual treatment” that Alafe suffered, which the Ontario Court Justice Ken Lenz had also determined. Lenz found his rights under section 7 and section 12 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms have been violated. Sec. 7: Life, liberty and security of a person Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Sec. 12: Treatment or punishment Everyone has the right to not be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. When this ruling was issued in April, Ken Lenz condemned Venn’s behaviour describing the treatment as “egregious” and “clearly degrading to human dignity”. Not only did Judge Lenz identify that Venn had violated police policies relating to treatment of people in custody with mental health concerns, he defended Alafe by acknowledging that there was “nothing the defendant could do to stop his mistreatment even when he did behave as requested for extensive periods of time.” This is not the first case in which Venn has mistreated people in custody with mental health concerns. Venn defended his actions, testifying in court that his actions were common practice in similar situations. Lenz challenged Venn’s testimony and reviewed the Brantford Police policy, which states: A blanket should not be provided only if there is a history of suicidal tendencies, destructive behaviour, or the officer in charge deems it harmful to the prisoner, any person, or the facility. The policy does not mention the actions of removing mattresses, but does state that clothing may only be removed if the prisoner is suicidal. During his testimony, Venn said he was not concerned he would self-harm until he witnessed the sock incident. Lenz continued to take Alafe’s side, saying that Venn was “bullying someone in his control because he could” and that it “looks more like punishment than an attempt to elicit good behaviour.” Parallel with Alafe’s belief, Lenz even addressed the video exhibits, Lenz said, “without the cell videos, he would’ve simply believed the officer’s testimony.” This particular case is causing Lenz to have a change of heart with regards to our police force. He went on to say that the is beginning to share the perception that Alafe has, that the police can’t be fully trusted. As a result, the judge stayed the charges against Alafe. Venn is still on the force, he remains on regular duties. In addition to this ruling, Brantford police chief Greg Nelson will be investigating into potential professional misconduct. The policy and training practices in relation to prisoner care and handling will also be addressed and reviewed by the Brantford Police Service, and their findings will be presented to the Police Services Board. At Devry Smith Frank LLP we have experienced lawyers in all areas of law. If you are looking for a lawyer or have general questions, please feel free to contact one of our lawyers today, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Criminal Law, Human Rights LawAugust 3, 2017June 22, 2020
Toronto Man Sentenced to Life in Prison, Eligible for Parole after 25 Years By: Nicolas Di Nardo, Junior Marketing & Administrator A man that was on the verge of marriage, Brett Ryan, 36, pleaded guilty last week to killing his mother, and two of his brothers in August 2016. However, Brett’s motivation for the events that occurred in August 2016 stem from his troubled past. In 2009, Ryan pleaded guilty to eight bank robberies, sentenced to five years. Due to pretrial custody he only ended up serving three years and nine months. Fast forward to June 2016. Ryan got a job at an IT company, but before he could even step foot in the office, he was fired after the employer discovered he had a criminal record. Days before the murders took place, Ryan admitted to his mother that he was unemployed, and has been lying to his fiancée. He was telling her that he was working from home. Susan, Brett’s mother had told her son to tell his fiancée the truth, and that she would support him financially for a period of time, says the statement of facts. Brett than became concerned that if he were to admit he was unemployed to his fiancée, that she would break off the relationship. In the statement of facts, he then admitted to a plan to kill his mother out of fear that she would expose him and that the wedding would then be called off. Ryan’s plan involved: Placing a crossbow in the garage of their family home Setting up his devices (laptop, iPad, iPhone) to be activated and create an internet footprint to serve as an alibi On the 25th day of August 2016, Ryan arrived to confront his mother around 1 p.m. The statement of facts reads that Ryan only intended to confront her about her threats of exposing him, and that he was going to convince her to continue to support him financially until the wedding and until he found a job. The argument unfortunately took a turn, and Ryan’s mother called her son Christopher, 42, to come help her. During the argument, Brett retrieved the crossbow and bolts from the garage. He then stabbed his mother with a bolt, and strangled her. Once Christopher arrived, he shot him with a bolt, and hid their bodies in the garage. As he was walking out, his other brother, Alexander, 29, arrived. They fought and Alexander was then stabbed. By this time, Brett’s plan had escalated and he was left with three of his family members’ bodies. Leigh, his older brother was in the house, and came downstairs to see what was going on. Leigh walked outside to see Ryan standing over Alexander’s body and ran into the house. He was then assaulted by Brett while attempting to call police. Leigh managed to escape to a neighbour’s house and called 911. Ryan was charged with three counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder. Last week in court, Brett Ryan pleaded guilty to the following: First-degree murder in the death of Christopher Ryan Two counts of second-degree murder of Susan Ryan and Alexander Ryan Attempted murder of his older brother Leigh He was sentenced to life in prison for first-degree murder, life in prison in the second-degree murders, and a 10-year sentence for the attempted murder of his brother. He is not eligible for parole for 25 years, and the sentences will run concurrently. If you require representation for criminal disputes, please contact Devry Smith Frank LLP’s criminal lawyers. For all other legal services and inquiries, please visit our website or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Criminal LawAugust 1, 2017June 22, 2020
Police Brutality Leads to Thrown Out Charges By: Katelyn Bell, Summer Law Student The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”) guarantees certain protections to Canadian citizens, such as the right to life, liberty and security of the person; the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure; and the right not to be subjected to any cruel or unusual treatment or punishment. The Charter regulates interactions between the state (federal, provincial and territorial governments) and individuals; it does not govern interactions between individuals. If the Charter rights of an accused person were violated during the investigation against them, the court will exclude the evidence obtained in the investigation. This results in a dismissal of the charges. As such, many accused persons will seek to advance a Charter violation argument, which is not often successful. However, in the case of Mr. Jung, the argument was successful. Mr. Jung was stopped at a RIDE spot check in late February 2016. Mr. Jung was over the legal limit and therefore failed the roadside breath test. Mr. Jung was arrested by police at the spot check. Mr. Jung and his girlfriend – a passenger in the vehicle – were than transported to the police station for additional, more conclusive, breath tests. Mr. Jung alleged that during his time with the arresting officers, his Charter rights were violated. According to Mr. Jung, Constable Gill physically assaulted him while he was handcuffed. Mr. Jung stated that the police repeatedly bashed his head with a phone receiver, while the police officer claimed that he accidently hit Jung with the phone receiver. Mr. Jung was also deprived of using the washroom for a prolonged period of time. As documented by in-car video evidence, the two police officers who arrested Jung at the RIDE spot check told Jung to urinate in the back seat of the police cruiser. Mr. Jung’s case was heard at the Ontario Court of Justice on April 5 and 6, 2017. Justice J. W. Bovard released his decision on the matter on July 19, 2017. Justice Bovard found that the police did in fact violate Mr. Jung’s Charter rights, and as such, the breath tests could not be admitted as evidence (at paragraph 126): “I find that in light of this very serious breach of Mr. Jung’s right to security of the person, and considering the behaviour of the police regarding the breach, to admit the breath tests into evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.” Besides the breath tests, there was no other evidence against Mr. Jung on the charge of impaired driving. Thus, the court was unable to find Mr. Jung guilty of impaired driving and the charge was therefore dismissed. Toronto police have said that the court’s decision is being reviewed by the internal Professional Standards Unit. Devry Smith Frank LLP (DSF) is a full service law firm located in Don Mills. If you require representation or have any questions, please contact DSF today. You may contact one of the many experienced lawyers on our website or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Human Rights LawJuly 31, 2017June 22, 2020
Canna Clinic Staff Charged in Multiple Police Raids Canna Clinic has been raided for the third time in only two weeks. Canna Clinic is a B.C.-based dispensary chain that has opened up in Toronto. The initial raid took place on June 22nd, targeting seven Toronto locations, six Toronto residences and six Vancouver locations. Police took the following actions: 80 employees arrested, charged, and released on scene Seized one vehicle Seized 178 kg of marijuana Seized 48 kg of THC edibles Seized 6.8 kg of shatter Seized 19 kg of cannabis resin Seized over $350,000 in cash See the official TPS News Release The second raid occurred at the Eglinton location, which re-opened two days later on Saturday June 24. Police raided it again on June 27th, seizing: 22 pounds of cannabis $13,000 cash Along with “associated equipment required for the operation of the dispensary” The following people were charged: Rocio Gomez Solar, 23, of Toronto Christine Sylvia Dragos, of Toronto Nicolette Daneiha Franklin, 22, of Toronto Daniel Sol, 22, of Toronto Keyanne Matthews, 26, of Toronto Esron Duncan, 47, of Brampton Hitarth Patel, 22, of Toronto They were all charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking a schedule II substance and possession of proceeds of crime. They are to appear in court on August 22, 2017. June 29th saw another raid, this time a the Yonge Street location. The Police seized: Drug paraphernalia Cash Electronics Other marijuana-related property The following people were charged: Houston-Nambu Bongeli, 21, of Oshawa Taylor Jonathan Henderson, 24, of Toronto Shauna Kaye Alicia Green, 27, of Brampton Adam Jonathan Miziolek, 27, of Toronto Justin John Bishop-Salij, 27, of Toronto Cypress Doreen Reid-Smith, 21, of Toronto Omar Abdul-Kader, 25, of Toronto Alderman James Bennett, 50, of Toronto They were all charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking a schedule II substance and possession of proceeds of crime. They are to appear in court on August 24, 2017. On Wednesday, July 5, 2017, a third search warrant was issued for the Eglinton location. This time around: 5 people were charged: Sean Vernon Guptill, 37, of Toronto Emmanuel Alejandro Herrera, 28, of Toronto Shannon Marie Jones, 29, of Toronto Zackery Scott Lucas, 22, of Toronto Ali Amini, 38, of Toronto They were all charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking a schedule II substance and possession of proceeds of crime. They are scheduled to appear in court on Tuesday, September 5, 2017. If you require representation for criminal disputes, please contact Devry Smith Frank LLP’s criminal lawyers. For all other legal services and inquiries, please visit our website or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Cannabis LawJuly 31, 2017June 22, 2020
Update: 700 Employees at Pearson International Airport Go On Strike By: Nicolas Di Nardo As noted in our blog published earlier this week, 700 employees have gone on strike at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport. The 700 employees represented by the Teamsters union went on strike on Thursday night, after rejecting an offer from their employer, Swissport. Luckily, the Greater Toronto Airports Authority has a contingency plan in place, however no details were provided. Airlines have also said they were prepared if their workers decided to join the picket line. Swissport is connected to 30 of the 74 airlines at Pearson which include airlines such as Sunwing, Air Transat, Air France and British Airways. The proposal presented to employees by Swissport was rejected by a 95 per cent margin. The union believes the contract is unfair to its workers, something they demonstrate as they march with signs and chant “respect” out front of Pearson Airport. So far it is unclear how long this will last, but if you’re trying to catch a plane in the coming days, you may want to check to make sure your airline is not one of those thirty airlines effected. For more details on the strike, please read our blog that goes into more detail on this matter. Devry Smith Frank LLP (“DSF”) is a full service law firm in Toronto that has experienced Labour Law Lawyers that can assist employers in the event of union organizing, bargaining and negotiations, and strikes. If you require a Labour law Lawyer, contact DSF’s Labour Lawyers today, or call our office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Employment LawJuly 28, 2017June 22, 2020
Man pleads Guilty to Disruption on Air Canada Flight By: Nicolas Di Nardo A drywaller from Amhurstview, Ontario is potentially facing up to two decades behind bars. Brandon Courneyea, the defendant, admitted to interfering with a flight attendant last month. His actions opened him up to a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 USD fine. Before Courneyea boarded the Air Canada flight, he took an undisclosed amount of cocaine according to court documents. What occurred on the flight as a result, include: Yelling at people for looking at him Threw paper at a passenger Moved erratically through the aircraft without shoes on Grabbed a hot coffee pot and swung it at passengers and crew Tried to open the aircraft cabin door Once again, grabbed a coffee pot before being subdued According to the plea agreement, when he went for the aircraft door he told people around him that “it would only take one guy to take the plane down and that he wanted to take everyone with him.” Once he was able to be subdued, he was bound to his seat with zip ties. The flight was diverted to Orlando, where he was arrested. He spent a number of days in a hospital before making his first court appearance. A Florida judge agreed to release Courneyea on $125,000 bail and allow him to return to Canada in the weeks prior to his guilty plea. Courneyea is a father of five, two of which have special needs, and at the moment his wife is caring for them on her own. His sentencing is set for September 11, 2017. At Devry Smith Frank LLP we have experienced lawyers in all areas of law. If you are looking for a lawyer or have general questions, please feel free to contact one of our lawyers today, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Criminal LawJuly 27, 2017June 22, 2020
Teen Charged After Colliding with Police Car By: Nicolas Di Nardo Tuesday night, a teen was charged after colliding with a police cruiser. The car the teenager was driving was allegedly stolen. Peel Region Police were responding to a call around 6 p.m. about an incident near Camilla Road Senior Public School. A group of teenagers in a black SUV had approached someone and it their bicycle with a bat. When police arrived on scene, Peel Const. Harinder Sohi says one person decided to try and flee in the SUV, hitting a police cruiser. The driver tried to flee again, but crashed. The rest of the teens decided to try and flee on foot, but police were able to arrest two people. The teen driving the vehicle has been charged with: Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle Possession of property obtained by crime Possession of a weapon for dangerous purpose The other was arrested, but was released without charges. No police officers or other individuals were injured during the incident. If you require representation for criminal disputes, please contact Devry Smith Frank LLP’s criminal lawyers. For all other legal services and inquiries, please visit our website or call us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Criminal LawJuly 27, 2017June 22, 2020
Possible Strike at Pearson Airport Beginning Thursday By: Nicolas Di Nardo Already checked in for your flight tomorrow? Flying out of Pearson by the end of the week? You better make sure you continuously check your flight time, because your flight could face some delays. Why, you may ask? Pearson’s ground crew for 30 airlines may be going on strike tomorrow, with the potential to delay flights. Monday, the union representing Swissport workers (approximately 700 employees) filed a 72-hour strike notice and will ask its members to shoot down the company’s final offer. Swissport believes their final offer is “fair and competitive, and expressed disappointment that the union may strike.” The union has not yet given members the reason why they are to reject this apparent fair and competitive offer. All workers that will be going on strike as early as Thursday night include: Baggage Handlers Cargo Handlers Cabin Cleaners The union is expressing their concerns with: Company’s decision to hire 250 temporary workers – without significant change in workload Union was only given a day’s warning before they began hiring the workers Training duration temps receive (3-4 days rather than 3-4 weeks) Don’t believe these workers can do their job with no experience and poor training They also claim that Swissport hired those 250 workers to put leverage on workers during the current round of contract negotiations. Which they believe is sacrificing airport safety. Swissport’s response to the hiring of temporary workers as a way to respond to the summer rush, something they are permitted to do under the collective agreement. As a result, the Teamsters have filed a formal complain with the Canadian Industrial Relations Board. Specifics could not be discussed due to the upcoming CIRB case. It will be interesting to see how many workers do go one strike, considering it has been mentioned that the union’s members don’t want to strike. Nevertheless, the Greater Toronto Airports Authority has a contingency plan in place in the event of a strike or labour disruption by Swissport workers. Devry Smith Frank LLP (“DSF”) is a full service law firm in Toronto that has experienced Labour Law Lawyers that can assist employers in the event of union organizing, bargaining and negotiations, and strikes. If you require a Labour law Lawyer, contact DSF’s Labour Lawyers today, or call our office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Labour LawJuly 26, 2017June 22, 2020