Based on coverage from CBC, Toronto Star, Times Colonist, and CJME.
A Court of King’s Bench judge in Edmonton has refused to temporarily suspend Alberta’s Back to School Act, the law the province used last fall to end a teachers’ strike and impose a contract.
The ongoing legal battles surrounding education in Canada have seen various outcomes, including a recent decision by the Yukon Supreme Court that ordered costs in an education lawsuit, which underscores the complexities of educational legislation across provinces. For more context on legal challenges in the education sector, see the Yukon Supreme Court's ruling on education costs.
The Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) had asked for an injunction that would have put the legislation on hold while its broader constitutional challenge moves through the courts. That would have reopened the door to a legal strike position for teachers, though the union said it would not take job action for at least three weeks if it won.
Edmonton judge rejects teachers’ injunction bid
Justice Douglas Mah said the ATA didn’t meet the legal test for an injunction, finding the union failed to show the issues were so serious and pressing that the law needed to be paused before the full case is heard.
Mah also said suspending the act would create “chaos and uncertainty” in the education system, since teachers would be back in a legal strike position and students could end up out of class again. In one of the strongest lines from the decision, he told court that disruption to the school system is something to be avoided “at all costs.”
At the same time, Mah stressed the ruling doesn’t decide the constitutional challenge itself. He pointed to a full hearing expected in September, telling teachers they will still have their day in court.
What Alberta’s Back to School Act does
The Back to School Act was passed in October after a three-week strike involving more than 51,000 teachers. It forced educators back to work and imposed a four-year collective agreement that teachers had previously rejected.
Under the act, teachers receive salary increases of three per cent per year. The law also commits the province to hiring 3,000 teachers and 1,500 educational assistants over three years.
It also bars teachers from strikes and other job action until 2028, a key reason the union is fighting it.
Notwithstanding clause fight at centre of court case
Premier Danielle Smith’s government invoked the Charter’s notwithstanding clause to protect the legislation from being struck down on Charter grounds, a move that drew national attention.
The ATA argues the province didn’t properly use the clause and is trying to override rights beyond what the Constitution allows. The union has also argued the clause was used retroactively to impose a contract starting in September 2024, more than a year before the bill was introduced.
The province argued the injunction wasn’t justified and that restoring the possibility of a strike would not be in the public interest.
Mah’s ruling acknowledged real harm to teachers. In one account of his comments, he said teachers suffered “if not despair and disrespect” from the government’s actions. But he also found the union didn’t prove that an injunction would prevent further “irreparable harm,” which is required to freeze a law before trial.
Political reactions from Alberta government and opposition
The ATA’s president, Jason Schilling, said outside court he wasn’t surprised by the injunction denial and argued the decision doesn’t sink the overall case. “This is not the win that they think it is,” he said of the government.
Justice Minister Mickey Amery’s office welcomed the decision, with his press secretary Heather Jenkins saying it “reaffirms that the notwithstanding clause is a legitimate constitutional tool” that lets elected governments act in the public interest.
NDP critic Amanda Chapman framed it more broadly, saying teachers’ rights are tied to everyone’s rights, and arguing the government “trample[d]” constitutional protections.
Court independence comments spill into the ruling
Mah also appeared to take issue with the premier’s recent criticism of “activist” courts and her push for Alberta to have more say in judicial appointments. He told court that judges follow the law and evidence, and that “personal and political sentiment do not matter.”
The bigger legal showdown now shifts to September, when the court is expected to hear the constitutional merits of the Back to School Act and Alberta’s use of the notwithstanding clause.
Support Independent Canadian News Analysis
The Canada Report is supported by readers like you. If this article helped you understand what’s happening, you can support our work with a one-time tip.
Support The Canada Report
