Can a union local commence an action for declarations that certain employment agreements and escrow agreements are void?

In Ginter v. Gardon, the court considered two actions, “the 1999 action” and “the 2000 action”. Nordheimer J. granted a representation order in the 1999 action permitting a union local to commence an action for declarations that certain employment agreements and escrow agreements were null and void. In that case, the local was a subset of the union and the action did not benefit the entire union. Nordheimer J. denied however, a request for a representation order in the 2000 action where he found that the claim was an “accumulation of personal claims”.

As outlined at paras. 16-20 of the Ginter v. Gardon decision, the refusal to grant the representation order in the 2000 action was based on four factors: 1. The proposed representatives had individual claims in addition to the representative claims and there was a real risk of conflict arising between the two. 2. Three of eleven executive board members did not wish to be parties and there was no evidence that the other members wished to be represented. 3. The claims in certain aspects were individual claims (e.g. loss of reputation, back pay etc.) and the nature the claim raised the concern that it would be unfair to the defendants to be denied the opportunity to examine each of the claimants for discovery. 4. The small number of parties involved meant that there were no appreciable savings of costs or other efficiencies to be achieved.