Alberta’s Labour Code was under fire again this summer, as the Labour Relations Board (LRB) struck down the section of the Code banning secondary picketing.

The LRB was ruling on an application from striking beer delivery workers at BDL. The workers wanted to picket a warehouse in west Edmonton where the employer had contracted out their jobs. Originally, the LRB had ruled that picketing the warehouse constituted "secondary picketing" – picketing at a place other than the employer’s worksite – and was therefore banned under the Labour Code.

However, after arguments from the union’s lawyer, the LRB reconsidered its ruling and in June issued a decision -- now know as the "Wallace decision" -- striking down the section of the Code as unconstitutional.

"This is a watershed decision," says AFL President Audrey Cormack. "The Labour Relations Board has, for once, stood up for workers’ right to picket. We have said for years that Alberta’s ban on secondary picketing is too broad and infringes on the right to free expression. And now we have been confirmed by the Board."

The Board stated that the warehouse owner was an "ally" of the employer and should not be allowed protection from the consequences of a strike action.

The Board then ruled the secondary picketing provision "inoperable". In other words, the section can no longer be enforced. The decision is the second in recent months to strike down picketing provisions in labour legislation. Last year, UFCW won a Supreme Court decision allowing strikers to distribute information at secondary locations.

Cormack sees the decision as a condemnation of Alberta’s regressive labour law. "In Alberta, employers have an unfair advantage because the law shields them from playing fair," says Cormack. "BDL and other employers have used the law to unfairly avoid bargaining in good faith with workers. Maybe this decision will mark a new trend to more fairness for workers."

Not surprisingly, both the Alberta Government and Construction Labour Relations (CLR), an association offering services to the owners of unionized construction companies in Alberta, have applied for a judicial review of the Wallace decision.

The government and CLR are asking for the Wallace decision to be quashed.They argue that the Board erred in not prohibiting the picketing, and further erred in concluding that Section 82 of the Labour Relations Code violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

"It is no surprise to see a representative of construction employers appealing the Wallace decision," observed AFL President Audrey Cormack. "Any strengthening of union solidarity – particularly if it provides an avenue for greater respect for the sanctity of the picket line – would be seen as a threat by these employers."

However, Cormack was particularly disturbed by the Government appeal. "The Labour Relations Board is an arm of this Government. They should respect what the Board is saying," said Cormack. "This would have been a great opportunity for the Government to address some of the gross shortcomings of the Alberta Labour Relations Code – as identified by their own labour relations specialists. Instead they have chosen to fight their own Board to keep Alberta’s labour laws in the dark ages," concluded Cormack. "That is a real shame."