'We're finally here': Court battle begins as unions fight province over wage-freeze bill

Lawyers for nearly 30 Manitoba labour groupsargued in court Monday a wage-freeze bill brought by the Progressive Conservative government is an economically motivated violation of the Charterright to free and meaningful collective bargaining.

Monday was the first day of atrial brought bythe Manitoba Federation of Labour and 28 unions representingthousands of public-sector workers, asking Justice Joan McKelvey to find Bill 28unconstitutional.

"I'm glad we're finally here. It's been 2 years," said Kevin Rebeck, president of the federation, after finishing his testimony in court Monday.

"There's 120,000 Manitobans and their families who are counting on us to speak up and defend their right to collective bargaining. We're doing our best to do so."

Bill 28, which waspassed by the Progressive Conservative governmentin 2017,mandated a two-year wage freeze for public-sector workers as each new collective agreement was negotiated. That would be followed by a 0.75 per cent pay increase in the third year and one per cent in the fourth.

The bill, also called the Public Services Sustainability Act,has neveractually been proclaimed into law, meaning it technically is not in effect but public-sector unions saygovernment negotiators have acted as though the wage freeze is in effect since the law is written to apply retroactively once proclaimed.

In his testimony Monday, Rebeck told court government officials misledhim and other labour leaders about plans to pass the legislation in early 2017,in a series of meetings arranged by the government with the stated goal ofgetting labour leaders' input on how to balance the budget.

Rebeck said officials, including then-finance minister Cameron Friesen,told him repeatedly the budget plan was a "blank slate," and withheld information about what kind of legislation, if any, would be brought forward. Documents entered into court Monday showed draft versions of wage freeze legislation were in the works by late 2016.

"I feel we were lied to," Rebeck said.

"I feel like labour leaders representing over 100,000 workers came to the table in good faith, asking questions, wanting to problem solve, wanting to work together on a solution to Manitoba's fiscal challenges, and were betrayed by government representatives."

'Elephant in the room' is law hasn't taken effect: lawyer

The unions involved in the case includethose representing Manitobanurses, lawyers, teachers and university faculty. On Monday, their lawyer Shannon Carson pointedto the fact the Supreme Court of Canadahas previously ruledcollective bargaining process is protectedby the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and argued the deficit and debt facing Manitoba are not at the level of a fiscal crisis.

In the past, the government has defended the bill by saying it's part of its effort to balance Manitoba's finances and defeat deficit.

A spokesperson for the province wrote in an email Monday the government is confident in the constitutionality of the law.

"It protects public services for all Manitobans, supports collective bargaining and delivers on our commitment to responsibly address the fiscal challenges we inherited," the spokesperson wrote, adding she wouldn't comment further because the matter is before the courts.

On Monday, provincial lawyer Heather Leonoffcalledargumentsabout how the law waswritten "irrelevant," and said the primary issue before the court is whether it's constitutional.

She arguedany discussion of the law's effect on bargaining will bebased on assumptions, because the lawhasn't taken effect.

"I think it is necessary that we all acknowledge the elephant in the room: the [Public Services Sustainability Act] is not law. It is having no legal effect on anyone," she said.

"Everything we are talking about regarding this act is entirely hypothetical."

Trial 'isn't about the zeros': Rebeck

On Monday, Rebeck reiteratedthe unions' fight against the bill isn't about guaranteeing wage increasesit's about protecting the collective bargaining process.

"This court case is not about the outcome. This isn't about the zeros," he said."This is about government not allowing people to meet at a table to problem solve together to find solutions that will work."

NDP Leader Wab Kinewsaid the government's efforts to seek an adjournment last month signal it's not confident in its case.

"The government's case is a joke, to be frank," he said. "They tried at the 11th hour to try and get the hearing not to happen at all, and I think that that tells you that they are not looking forward to what the judge is going to tell them at the end of this."

The unions will be in court until Dec. 5, and then again in February for three days to make their case.

The trial resumes Tuesday.