• mockupRIIR

    Volume 78-3 is online!

    RI/IR is an open access journal. Enjoy your reading!

  • New associate editors

    New associate editors

    Welcome to our new associate editors : Professor Tania Saba, Professor Ernesto Noronha, Professor Ann Frost and Professor Jean-Étienne Joullié!

  • Campus Hiver

    RIIR in one minute

    Watch this short video that introduce the journal, its recent accomplishments and our future ambitions!

Accès à la justice des travailleurs de plateformes numériques : Réponses contrastées des tribunaux canadiens et américains

Accès à la justice des travailleurs de plateformes numériques : Réponses contrastées des tribunaux canadiens et américains

Urwana Coiquaud et Isabelle Martin

Volume : 74-3 (2019)

Abstract

With the introduction of digital platforms in the Canadian labour law’s landscape comes an increased used of agreements imposing arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism. To challenge their classification as independent workers and gain employment standards acts’ protection, gig workers therefore need to submit their disputes to a private proceeding, often located outside Canada. It is in this context that the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision to invalidate the arbitration clause in Heller v Uber Technologies Inc must be readHaving granted leave for appeal, will the Supreme Court of Canada follow in the footsteps of American law and allow mandatory arbitration agreements to impede collective actions challenging the misclassification of gig workers? Our study of the Ontarian and American decisions regarding the validity of mandatory arbitration agreements between Uber and its drivers brings to light the determining impact of the approach chosen by courts.

Keywords: arbitration clause, access to justice, status of platform workers, dispute resolution mechanism, Ontario, United States.