In the recent decision indexed as 2026 CIRB 1238 (the “Decision”), the Canada Industrial Relations Board (the “Board”) confirmed, following submissions from Inlet Law’s Martin Sheard and Navpreet Chhina, not all companies operating vessels within BC waterways are federally regulated.
The Facts:
The Decision’s respondent is a business which provides preventative pollution control services to ships loading and unloading oil in the Vancouver Harbour in British Columbia. The Decision’s complainant was the respondent’s former employee.
Following his termination in 2022, the complainant filed an unjust dismissal complaint under Part III of the Canada Labour Code (the “Code”). Acting on behalf of the respondent, Inlet Law applied to dismiss the complaint on the basis that the respondent’s labour relations fall within provincial jurisdiction and are not governed by the Code.
The Decision:
In agreeing with the respondent and dismissing the complaint, the Board held that:
- The respondent was not itself a federal work, undertaking, or business; and
- While the respondent provided services to federal works or undertakings, including to oil facilities, its operations were not integral or essential to those undertakings.
In reaching its decision, the Board found that:
- The respondent provided services to multiple clients rather than one dominant company;
- There was no evidence that employees of the oil facilities directed the respondent’s employees;
- There was no evidence that the oil facilities had previously performed the work now carried out by the respondent; and
- The respondent’s services assisted in preventing marine oil pollution during loading and unloading operations but did not directly involve navigation or the movement of vessels.
Accordingly, the Board concluded that the respondent’s employees do not work in or in connection with a federal work, undertaking, or business within the meaning of the Canada Labour Code and the Constitution Act, 1867. The complaint therefore fell outside the Board’s jurisdiction, the respondent’s preliminary objection was upheld, and the complaint was dismissed.