Skip to content

Client Update: Special Project Orders the next milestone for Muskrat Falls progress

On June 17, 2013, pursuant to the recently amended Section 70 of the Labour Relations Act for Newfoundland and Labrador (“NL”), the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador issued three Special Project Orders (“SPOs”) in respect of the Muskrat Falls phase of the Lower Churchill Hydro Electric Generation Project (“Muskrat Falls Project”).

For those seeking to do work on the Muskrat Falls Project, familiarization with the SPOs and the referenced agreements is essential.

The SPOs have the effect of displacing the collective agreements negotiated between the Construction Labour Relations Association (the accredited employer in the Commercial Industrial Division of the NL construction industry) and the individual trade unions who represent the tradespersons in that division. They also operate to create a virtually exclusive unionized workplace.

The SPOs and the prescribed Collective Agreements designate three separate work scopes for the Muskrat Falls Project, each with its own collective agreement and an umbrella dispute resolution agreement.

The three work scopes of the Muskrat Falls Project are:

  • Lower Churchill reservoir clearing
  • Lower Churchill hydro generation
  • Lower Churchill transmission

The umbrella agreement for dispute resolution, the Overlap Dispute Resolution Agreement, is designed to resolve disputes where there are overlaps in the work of one or more contractors on two or more of the three separate work scopes of the Muskrat Falls Project.

Care must be taken not to assume that the collective agreements for each work scope of the Muskrat Falls Project follow the pattern of previous SPOs or that all the construction trades are involved with a special project collective agreement respecting a particular scope of work; there are three distinct collective agreements in respect of the Muskrat Falls Project as a whole.

The Special Project collective agreements allow a union or non-union contractor to become involved on the site but, whether union or non-union, a contractor is obligated to acquire its labour in accordance with the applicable Special Project Agreement hiring protocols. The hiring protocols are consistent with the Lower Churchill Construction Projects Benefits Strategy and Lower Churchill Innu Impacts and Benefits Agreement. These agreements ensure priority of hiring for qualified Labrador Innu, qualified Labrador residents and qualified residents of the Island portion of the Province. Unionized contractors may have some flexibility respecting use of their regular unionized employees on the Muskrat Falls Project, but non-union contractors have little to no flexibility in this regard.

The three collective agreements which have been prescribed for the three separate work scopes of the Muskrat Falls Project are:

  • Collective Agreement between Muskrat Falls Employers’ Association and the Resource Development Trades Council of Newfoundland and Labrador* (Generating Facility Agreement).
    –  The Trades Council represents all construction trades operating
    in the Province.
  • Collective Agreement between Lower Churchill Transmission Construction Employers’ Association Inc. and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1620 (Transmission Agreement).
  • Collective Agreement between Lower Churchill Reservoir Clearing Employers’ Association Inc. and Labourers’ International Union of North America and the Construction and General Labourers’ Union, Rock and Tunnel Workers, Local 1208 (Reservoir Clearing Agreement).

It is recommended that clients review, paying particular attention to, the collective agreement related to the scope of the work targeted and, where there exists overlap, the collective agreement relevant to either or both of the work scopes prescribed by the other SPOs. It is also recommended that the Overlap Dispute Resolution Agreement be reviewed in order to fully understand the financial and labour cost implications of work which may involve two or more of the work scopes within the Muskrat Falls Project.

As with previous special projects, a non-union contractor which follows the hiring provisions of the applicable Special Project Agreement(s) does not automatically become a unionized contractor at the conclusion of work on the Special Project. In the Muskrat Falls Project wind-down process each contractor who is non-union prior to commencing work on the Special Project should ensure care is taken during its layoff and wind-down processes. Similarly, a contractor bound by one or more of the Provincial Commercial Industrial Division collective agreements when commencing work on the Special Project may avoid the applicability of additional Provincial agreements by exercising care during its layoff and wind-down process as the work is completed.

The issuance of the SPOs marks another significant milestone in the recently sanctioned $7.7 billion dollar Muskrat Falls Project.

We would be pleased to assist with any legal and strategic planning issues arising from proposed or actual involvement in the Muskrat Falls Project.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court

January 3, 2013

Recent changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1986, SNL 1986, c 42, Sch D On December 14, 2012, several changes were made to the Rules of the Supreme Court. These changes include: who may act…

Read More

Doing Business in Atlantic Canada (Winter 2012) (Canadian Lawyer magazine supplement)

January 1, 2013

IN THIS ISSUE: Putting Trust in your Estate Planning, by Paul Coxworthy and Michael McGonnell The Risks, for Insurers in Entering Administration Services Only (ASO) Contracts, by Tyana Caplan Angels in Atlantic Canada, by Allison McCarthy, Gavin Stuttard and Adam Bata…

Read More

Client Update – Changes to the Human Rights Legislation in Newfoundland and Labrador

July 13, 2010

Bill 31, An Act Respecting Human Rights, came into force on June 24, 2010 replacing the Human Rights Code (the “Code”). For more information, please download a copy of this client update.

Read More

Atlantic Business Counsel – December 2009

December 18, 2009

IN THIS ISSUE Expanded Fines and Penalties for Environmental Offences: The New Federal Environmental Enforcement Act Spam about to be Canned? Preparing a Business for Sale Business Disputes Corner – Place of Arbitration and Selected…

Read More

Client Update – General Damage Cap Upheld By the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

December 15, 2009

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld the province’s legislative limits on general damage recovery for “minor injuries”. Today’s decision, authored by Chief Justice Michael MacDonald, completely affirms the January 2009 decision of…

Read More

Client Update – New Planning Opportunities For ULCs

December 4, 2009

The Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) announced helpful administrative positions concerning the new rules under the Fifth Protocol to the Canada-US Income Tax Convention, 1980 which will come into effect on January 1, 2010. The CRA…

Read More

Atlantic Construction Counsel – Fall 2009

November 26, 2009

IN THIS ISSUE Contractor Held Liable for Business Interruption: Heyes v. City of Vancouver, 2009 BCSC 651 When Can a Tendering Authority Walk Away if Bids are Too High? Crown Paving Ltd. v. Newfoundland &…

Read More

Client Update – Nova Scotia Unlimited Companies: An Update

November 6, 2009

Withholding tax and other issues under the Fifth Protocol The Fifth Protocol to the Canada-US Tax Convention, 1980 introduced significant changes which may affect the use of most unlimited companies and other so-called ULCs. These…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Fall 2009

October 14, 2009

IN THIS ISSUE An Eye for an Eye: Alberta Court of Appeal Upholds Finding of Retaliation Liability as a Result of Generosity in Quebec Undue Hardship Established in Scent Case Parents of Twins Get Double…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top