(Canadian Court case,
unfortunately, have no affect on American Court system.)
While the unanimous 7 to 0 ruling immediately
means Monsanto Canada Inc., will have to pay out additional benefits
to 146 workers who were fired in 1997-98, it could also have future
ramifications for other
Ontario employers,
according to the Canadian Press.
It could also have an impact beyond
Ontario, depending on
pension rules in other jurisdictions with six other provinces and the
federal government currently considering similar pension legislation,
the CP said.
At issue was whether companies must perform a
"partial wind-up" of pension plans - and distribute the surplus - when
they shut down plants or otherwise shed a large number of workers. The
Monsanto dispute centered on $3 million, the estimated share for the
laid-off employees in a larger surplus of $19 million in the company
pension plan. The company announced it would give out some of the
overage, but only to the 45 terminated employees aged 50 or older.
That proposal was blocked by the Financial
Services Commission, the provincial regulatory body, which ruled that
the surplus had to be distributed equitably. An appeal tribunal
reversed the ruling and agreed with Monsanto. But further court action
restored the fired workers’ claim to share in the windfall.
The last judgment in favor of the workers,
delivered by the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2002, was considered a
political bombshell for the Conservative government of then-premier
Ernie Eves that had just introduced legislation to make it easier for
companies to retain pension surpluses.
At the time, labor groups and retirees denounced
the measure, saying it opened the door to corporate raids on money
that belonged to employees. Liberal
Dalton McGuinty - then in
opposition, now the premier - called the bill "patently unfair" and
said it trampled on the rights of workers. In the wake of the appeal
court ruling, Janet Ecker, the finance minister at the time, was
forced to withdraw the bill.