Canadian Lawyer

LEGAL REPORT/LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT an impediment to organizing and strike activities without any taxation justification." Harnum notes that at $1,000 a day per infraction, the penalty to the United States Office of Management and Budget that esti- mates that in the U.S., completing the forms under similar legisla- tion introduced in 2005, requires over 550 hours of work each year for some unions. There will also be a significant amount of government money required to ensure compliance. As written, the disclosure requirements appear to be well in " He refers excess of those imposed on other corporate entities. "In the rela- tively new regime for charities, the disclosure requirements are far, far less," states Harnum. He finds Hiebert' are more complex entities and therefore require greater scrutiny "disingenuous." "I query whether the Red Cross or the Canadian Cancer Society would be any less sophisticated than a small union organization that may have 10 members and no administration at all. s argument that unions ety of filings a public company is required to provide by virtue of the fact that the public is being invited to invest in it. When considering private corporations, which he points out can also receive many types of government benefits, he does not Ball Professional Corporation Excellence in Employment & Labour Law • Counsel in Leading Cases • • Author of Leading Treatise • Wrongful Dismissal Employment Law Human Rights Post Employment Competition Civil Litigation Appellate Advocacy Disability Referrals on behalf of employees and employers respected 82 Scollard Street, Toronto, Canada, M5R 1G2 Contact Stacey Ball at (416) 921-7997 ext. 225 or srball@82scollard.com web: www.staceyball.com 44 N O VEMBER / D ECEMBER 2012 www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com all_CL_Mar_12.indd 1 12-03-13 2:27 PM " He also finds the requirements far more broad than the vari- would be significant for a small local branch, a small pension fund, or unit benefit fund. He also points to the cost of compli- ance. "For a pension fund that administers billions of dollar in benefits, the cost would be absolutely astronomical. see them ever being required to meet similar standards. "I can't imagine a corporation being required to disclose the percentage of time they spent in meetings, or lobbying, in HR work, or anti- organizing activities." The legislation will also affect union trust funds that admin- ister pension and health and disability funds. "There are all sorts of funds set up for the benefit of employees," notes Harnum. "If a fund serves 1,000 people, there might only be five to 10 unionized employees among them. Many are sponsored by the employer and administered by the employer and have nothing to do with union dues or labour activities." Harnum does not think the proposed legislation will assist the Canadian public in gauging the effectiveness of how union dues are spent, and this raises the question whether anyone but mem- bers have a right to the information. "The importance of disclo- sure is not for the public, but for members so they can scrutinize the financial goings-on of the organization they are members of, says Glavin. A frequently aired argument is that the information should at " least be available to those who pay union dues but are not mem- bers of the union. While union responsibilities clearly extend to represent those who pay dues but are not members, the require- ments for financial disclosure do not. "I think that an argument could be made that if you are paying dues you have a right to look at the financial statements," agrees Glavin. "If that' concern, it wouldn't be a problem to fix it in the existing financial disclosure legislation. However, there are very few individuals who work in a bargaining unit who are not members — probably a fraction of one per cent." There is, however, some major noise coming from those con- s the big cerned with privacy rights. David Fraser, of McInnes Cooper in Halifax, points out that particulars of how much is paid and to whom will not only include union employees and officers but striking employees. "I think people would be legitimately con- cerned at the release of that information. If you are not a public employee, most people expect salary information to be treated confidentially. Most people would also expect benefit information to remain private. clash with privacy rights legislation. It would require reporting and disclosure and repositing on a government web site accessible by all Canadians and non-Canadians. It will have a search engine that will allow individuals to collate statistics from the informa- tion. No one would countenance this in the corporate world. It would be seen as Big Brother run amok." For information about an organization, Fraser says trade Glavin says: "Clearly the legislation in its current form would " secrets protections would not apply as the union is not competing in a full and open market as anticipated by that system of rights. Labour lawyer Ron Pink, of Pink Larkin in Halifax, anticipates more impact on private business from open information about union payments. "The competition can find out how many man hours you worked by seeing how much was contributed to the union and therefore see how competitive you are. It will also be possible to see how much the union has paid to suppliers and consultants which will enable their competitors to underbid them."

• Cover