PSAC Pension Fightback Campaign

In the spotlight ... February 8   »

Government’s move to have Pension Surplus case heard by Federal Court dismissed

The federal government’s motion to have the Court case on ‘Ownership of Surplus in the Public Service Superannuation Account’ shifted to the Federal Court, Trial Division, was dismissed on December 29, 2000 by the Ontario Superior Court.. The Attorney-General of Canada responded to the PSAC’s Notice of the action by filing a motion to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice arguing that the claims raised by the PSAC were within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Court.

Union’s Statement of Claim

The PSAC’s Statement of Claim, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on November 8, 1999, alleges:

• a violation of Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It states that public service workers are a uniquely disadvantaged group contemplated by Section 15 "because their employer, the Government of Canada, has consistently and repeatedly resorted to using its legislative power to unilaterally amend or revoke the terms and conditions of its employees to their detriment". In this case, the government has not given similar rights to other employers in the federal jurisdiction to unilaterally appropriate a pension surplus without legal authority. Instead, it attacks only federal government employees and perpetuates the stereotypical view that public service workers enjoy undeserved benefits and are therefore less deserving of their legal rights.

• the provisions of the Act which deny access to the Courts are offensive of the rule of law in Canada and the legitimate rights and expectations of contributors respecting their interests in the fund and its current surplus created, in part, by their contributions;

• as asserted by the PSAC, the government’s action constitutes a breach of contract in that the pension fund is part of the terms and conditions of employment governing public service workers.

• as manager of the fund, the government has been impressed with a trust and its actions "are subject to a fiduciary obligation to manage and account for the monies in the Plan in a fashion which is in the best interest of the contributors to the Plan. Clearly, the government has preferred its own interests to the complete exclusion of the interests of the contributors.

• that the surplus has arisen from the commingled amounts from the contributors and the employer credited to the Superannuation Account. In turn, the surplus consists, in part, of the workers’ contributions and the interest credit. At least, the employees have a pro rata interest in any surplus based on their share of the total contributions.

No date for the hearing has been set.

The next step in the Pension Surplus case is to set dates for Discovery. The Attorney-General (government) has indicated that it does not agree with the various bargaining agents being named in the Statement of Claim.

The Court Case is being jointly financed by various bargaining agents and staff associations.