EDMONTON — The Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) is suing the provincial government over a law that ended a recent teachers' strike. The union is specifically contesting the government's use of the notwithstanding clause from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in this legislation.

Jason Schilling, president of the ATA, announced that the union has filed a legal application seeking to pause the law until a full constitutional review can take place. Schilling argues that the government's invocation of the notwithstanding clause is unconstitutional and undermines the judicial system. He stated, "This legal action is not symbolic; it is necessary. We’re standing up for the [Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms] itself, for the rule of law and for the limits that protect citizens from arbitrary government decisions."

The law in question, known as Bill 2 — the Back to School Act, was enacted to end Alberta's first provincewide teachers' strike, which lasted over three weeks and involved approximately 51,000 public, separate, and francophone teachers. The strike concluded on October 29 when the government mandated teachers to return to work.

In its court application, the ATA is requesting an interlocutory injunction to halt the enforcement of Bill 2 while the case is being heard. The union is also asking the court to declare that the use of the notwithstanding clause was "improper and invalid," that a specific section of Bill 2 related to court challenges is unconstitutional, and that the law infringes on teachers' rights to freedom of association and expression.

The notwithstanding clause allows governments to bypass certain Charter rights for a period of up to five years, with the option for renewal. Premier Danielle Smith's government invoked this clause last week, citing the complexity of negotiations, the scale of the strike, and the impact on students as reasons for its decision.

This legal challenge raises significant questions about the balance of power between the government and its citizens, particularly regarding labor rights and constitutional protections. The outcome of this case could have lasting implications for workers' rights across the province.