An understanding of the principles of contract interpretation is indispensable for anyone involved in the negotiation or administration of a collective agreement, from front-line managers and union representatives to advocates in the arbitration process. The ground rules of collective agreement interpretation have seen a notable shift in recent years. While the traditional techniques of reading a collective agreement, such as the “plain meaning” rule, still play a central role, arbitrators increasingly utilize a more “contextual” approach that takes into account relevant background in order to determine the parties’ intent. In this workshop, experienced counsel will equip participants with the knowledge they need to deal effectively with the wide array of interpretation disputes that arise in a unionized setting.

• What are the most commonly applied rules of collective agreement interpretation?
• What is the difference between the “plain meaning” approach and a purposive approach?
• When can evidence of past practice or negotiating history be used as an aid to interpretation?
• How do arbitrators reconcile negotiated contract language and the contrary provisions of employment-related statutes, e.g. human rights and employment standards legislation?
• What is “contextual evidence,” as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Sattva case? In what circumstances can such evidence be admitted and relied upon to shed light on the meaning of a disputed clause?
• How has the use of the “contextual” approach changed the way in which established rules of interpretation are applied?