BC NDP misunderstands legislation and lawyers on the lawn, bail conditions and hidden camera class action

Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:
For many years, the BC government has paid all lawyers working for it on the same basis as contracts negotiated by the union representing Crown Counsel. Recently the government decided to stop doing this. That decision likely increased support for the rest of the lawyers to sign up to join the BC Government Lawyers Association: 75% did so.
The BC NDP government, whose core support is organized labour, recently introduced legislation entitled the Public Service Labour Relations Amendment Act, 2023. This act is also referred to as Bill-5.
Bill-5 is only half a page long. On the face of it, the bill appears to make some changes to the definition of “employee” in an act called the Public Service Labour Relations Act but it’s entirely unclear what impact this change would have. The Explanatory Note, which is included with Bill-5, is equally opaque.
Without reading and carefully analyzing the Public Service Labour Relations Act, it’s impossible to determine what impact the definition change would have.
The explanation provided by Minister Katrine Conroy when she introduced the bill and when she answered questions about it indicated she did not know or was misinformed about the effect of Bill-5.
When she spoke about it in the legislature Minister Katrine Conroy indicated that Bill-5 would permit the lawyers to have the BC Government Lawyers Association represent them as they wished. This is a position completely consistent with the position you’d expect from an NDP government.
If enacted, Bill-5 would force the lawyers to join a union they don’t want to: the Professional Employees Association.
That union has also said they don’t want a group of people who don’t want to join them being forced to do so.
The foregoing circumstance resulted in a most unusual spectacle of government lawyers protesting on the lawn of the legislature.
Without the benefit of advice from the flock of lawyers on the lawn of the legislature, the BC NDP government seems to have been misled about the effect of the legislation it introduced.
Also, on the show, the BCCA finds youth bail conditions improperly imposed on the show. The trial judge in the case ordered the young person to follow all rules of the house they were living at and to accept medical treatment.
The BCCA concluded that the judge didn’t have details of the house rules, the rules could change, and a failure to comply could result in the young person going to jail. In these circumstances, the condition wasn’t permissible.
The condition requiring medical treatment was also impermissible because, as with adults, a mature youth had a constitutional right not to be ordered to undergo medical treatment without their consent.
Finally, on the show, a class action on behalf of 13 women secretly video recorded in the bathroom at a grocery store is certified against both the manager who did the recording and the corporation that owned the store. Some of the resulting pictures and videos were posted on pornographic websites.
Follow this link for links to the cases discussed and a transcript of the show.