Canada -   

1

Top court won't hear challenge from longshoremen

The Supreme Court of Canada is seen in Ottawa on Tuesday, Dec. 22, 2009. (Pawel Dwulit / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
The Supreme Court of Canada is seen in Ottawa on Tuesday, Dec. 22, 2009. (Pawel Dwulit / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | Print Facebook   

Date: Friday Mar. 12, 2010 7:04 AM ET

OTTAWA — Longshoremen have lost a legal bid to contest marine security regulations they call an unwarranted invasion of their privacy.

The Supreme Court of Canada announced Thursday that it won't hear a challenge from the International Longshore and Warehouse Union of Canada.

At issue was the Federal Court of Appeal's ruling that the Marine Transportation Security Regulations do not violate the employees' constitutional guarantees.

The regulations, which allow authorities to screen marine workers with sensitive jobs, were brought in after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The information gathered from workers includes details about the employees, their spouses and friends, as well as other personal background.

Port workers area also subject to a criminal record check and, if deemed necessary, a security assessment by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

The union and several local units, mainly in Vancouver, objected and took their case to court.

Calls to the union seeking comment were not returned.

Mark Erdman, of Port Metro Vancouver, said he couldn't comment directly on the high court's decision.

But he said it will be "business as usual" at the port, where personnel have been undergoing security clearance checks for a few years.

"We've been doing the security screenings," he said, adding that the measures had to be put into place in order to comply with international security standards.

"We have to have security background checks for anyone who is accessing secure areas of the port."

In introducing the new security measures, the federal government pointed out that background checks have been in place at airports since 1985.

However, in the statement of claim filed with B.C. Supreme Court, the union said the regulations are "unconstitutionally vague and overbroad" and open the door to differential treatment for employees based on their marital and family status.

It also said they restrict port workers' rights "to associate with various organizations and groups for social, cultural, political, religious and ideological reasons."

Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Canada Stories

Air Canada planes land at Pierre Elliott Trudeau Airport

Air Canada reaches tentative deal with machinists

More

Most Talked about Stories

I think he was pushed to take matters into his own hands. I have a teenage son and if he was involved with a drug dealer I would be furious and try anything to save him like this father did for his daughter. Why do police often say they can't do anything until it's too late? Whether it be a drug dealer or an abusive spouse, the police can't seem to do anything until something really bad happens. In this case they could have raided the drug dealers home and arrested him. The whole town knew what was going on in that house but yet the police chose to do nothing. Release this man and give him a medal for doing the right thing by his daughter. I can't wait to see the episode on W5, I will certainly be watching this one.

Shelley

W5: How far would you go to save your child?