Supreme Court dismisses ONTC Pensioners' case

The Supreme Court of Canada handed down its decision to dismiss the ONTC Pensioner's class action lawsuit today.

CAW Local 103 President Brian Kelly says that they are happy with the decision.

“It should have been handled through collective bargaining act the whole time because that is the avenue to deal with such matters.”

“A lot of time has been wasted and the only people to make money were the lawyers,” he adds.

Kelly says he is not sure what happens next as the decision states dismissed with costs, but for now he considers the issue as being over.

“I’m not sure where we go now from here, but we will continue to try to make improvements for our pensioners now that this distraction is out of the way.”

Case details are contained below.

**************************

DISMISSED WITH COSTS / REJETÉES AVEC DÉPENS

Daniel E. MacDougall, et al. v. Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, et al. (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave) (32284)

Coram: McLachlin / Fish / Rothstein

*****

32284 Daniel E. MacDougall, Arthur J. Tiernay, Angus Baker, Malcolm Kerr and Garry Besserer v. Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada and its Local 103 (the “CAW”) and Brian Stevens on his own behalf and on behalf of the Employees of the Defendant, Ontario Northland Transportation Commission (“ONTC”) represented by the CAW, United Transportation Union (“UTU”) and Philip Koning, on his own behalf and on behalf of all members of the UTU and its Local 1161 employed by the Defendant ONTC, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers System Council No. 11 Local 2061 (“IBEW”) and Gordon Louttit on his own behalf and on behalf of all members of IBEW System Council No. 11, Local 2601 employed by the Defendant ONTC, United Steel Workers of America and its Local 1976 (“USWA Local 1976”) and Ron Marleau on his behalf and on behalf of all members of the USWA, Local 1976 employed by the Defendant ONTC, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (“BLE”), and Shawn O’Donnell, on his own behalf and on behalf of all members of the BLE employed by the Defendant ONTC (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Civil procedure Class actions Certification proceedings What factors are to be considered in determining whether an alternative procedure represents a reasonably available means of resolving the claims of a proposed class that is preferable to a class proceeding? What is the nature of a conflict that would prevent a plaintiff from being appointed as a representative of a defined class or subclass in a class proceeding?

The Applicants, with the exception of Besserer, are retired former employees of the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission (“ONTC”) who sought to certify a class proceeding against their former employer with respect to their ONTC pension plan. The Applicants propose to represent 1,369 beneficiaries of the plan, with the exception of active employees represented by unions and a group of retirees who plan to obtain separate class certification. In the alternative, the Applicants propose that a number of sub classes be certified, each represented by one of the named Applicants. The six Respondent unions represent 800 out of 975 active ONTC employees and they all oppose certification. The pension plan is an ongoing defined benefit contributory pension plan established in 1939. There is no written trust agreement in respect of the plan. In the proposed action, the Applicants seek declarations that the plan is a trust, that ONTC can no longer administer the plan, and that the amendments made to the plan are in breach of trust. They also seek restitution to the plan by ONTC and punitive damages. The Applicants object to amendments made to the plan that concern rights to any surplus, employee contribution holidays, and early retirement benefits. They also object to an amendment that allows administrative expenses to be paid from the plan. The Respondent unions side with the Applicants on the trust and administrative expenses issues, but are opposite in interest on the rest. If found to be in breach of trust, the Applicants also seek a declaration that ONTC remains contractually bound to continue payment of enhanced retirement benefits, an injunction prohibiting ONTC from dealing with the plan funds and an order prohibiting ONTC from acting as trustee. Although the relief sought by the Applicants would affect the different subgroups differently, they were all of the view that the proposed action should be certified. The Applicants submitted that there were 29 common issues raised in their proposed action.

**************************