In Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 401, 2013 SCC 62, the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") struck down Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act ("PIPA"). The SCC ruled that the limitations that the law placed on union picket-line activities were a violation of the UFCW's (the "Union") s.2(b) Charter right of freedom of expression and the impact of the violation was disproportionate and the infringement was not justifiable under the s.1 reasonable limits clause of the Charter. The declaration of invalidity was issued, in part, at the request of both the Attorney General of Alberta and the Information and Privacy Commissioner (the "Commissioner") of Alberta, both of which claimed that given the "comprehensive and integrated" nature of the legislation, the entire statute should fall and be re-worked (para. 40). The Government of Alberta has been given 12 months to draft constitutionally compliant legislation.

The legal dispute arose due to the Union's picket-line activity of video-taping anyone who crossed the picket line at the Palace Casino in Edmonton. The Union posted notices near the area stating that anyone crossing the picket line would be video-taped and/or photographed and that their photograph may be posted on a public website for viewing. Three individuals complained to the Commissioner. One such complainant was the Vice-President of the Casino who claimed that pictures of him were used "on a poster displayed at the picket line with the text: "This is [x's] Police Mugshot" (para 5). Although no recordings were actually posted online, the Union was ultimately ordered to stop the video-taping and photography and to destroy any images or recordings it had in its possession.

On judicial review, both the Court of Queen's Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeal sided with the Union, finding that there was a Charter violation and that violation could not be saved by s.1 of the Charter. The SCC was called upon to determine whether or not PIPA infringed on the Union's s.2(b) right of freedom of expression and if so, whether the infringement was justifiable. The SCC found that the type of activity engaged in by the Union was protected by s.2(b) and the impact of stop-order was disproportionate, having regard to the overall benefits and protections offered to the general public by PIPA. In siding with the Union, the SCC noted that the information that was collected by the Union could easily have been collected by anyone else, including journalists, given that the picketing was "readily and publicly observable" for all to see (para 26). Perhaps most importantly, the Court noted that PIPA effectively prohibited the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information for "many legitimate, expressive purposes related to labour relations." (para 28). The Court also noted that picketing is one of the most effective tools that a union has in exerting economic pressure on the employer and the effectiveness of this tool is "dependent on the ability of a union to try to convince the public not to cross the picket line and do business with the employer" (para 36).

This decision may have a profound impact on the conduct of lawful strikes in Alberta. The decision was 9-0 and adds a powerful tool to a union's 'arsenal' during a strike. This decision will be of specific interest to management and potential replacement workers who intend on crossing the picket line during a strike. However, it will also be of interest to the general public who may also be subjected to recording, should they choose to visit a business during a labour dispute where this kind of recording is taking place. Given the declaration of invalidity, the Government of Alberta has been given 12 months to draft new legislation and PIPA should still be considered as legally in force until the expiration of those 12 months or until it is repealed.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.