BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.

The following article forms the basis of an Appeal of #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-2014) in which two judges and the Respondent lawyer are accused of fraud.


QUOTES: 1) "Ma'am, this is America. If a businessman wants to wipe his ass he better have a lawyer on retainer."  The Innocent   D. Baldacci

2) 'When you see a problem, you ask, I wonder how we can solve it? rather than I wonder how fast we can run away from it? National Geographics  Neil Tyson (Hayden Planetarium)

3) 'People who are willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both'  Ben Franklin





1) In March of 1985, as a senior teacher in West Vancouver, B.C., I provided material to the Education Ministry in Victoria relating to fraud as I had caught West Vancouver Secondary principal, John Williams, altering my Professional Report on a teacher from a positive to a negative.

2) Victoria's answer was to invoke BILL 35 and to hi-jack the arbitration dealing with my lay-off in a 'sweetheart deal' between Employer and Union (administrators were part of the Union until 1988 when they were separated by legislation).

3) In 1986, the court under Justice Mary Southin (r. 2004) quashed the arbitration leaving me in a permanent state of limbo where no compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. SEE web for detailed version.

4) Over 8 separate courts and over 30 judges later, no final decision has been made leaving me spinning my wheels while the entire Canadian Justice System has sunk down into a legal black hole due to systematic judicial abuse. From that there is no recovery for democratic Canada.

5) The politicians have remained quiet because the Canadian media has boycotted this national story which now negatively affects 35 million Canadians. Considering that NDP Opposition leader, Thomas Mulcair, and Green Party's, Elizabeth May, are lawyers, one can see the level of perfidy which negatively affects our nation as no-one can stand up to the PMO

6) Currently, the Ontario Appeal Court under Chief Justice, George Strathy, is indulging in the same level of cover-up paralleling the original lay-off.

7) The OCTOBER 21-2014 Newsletter entitled 'Running a court within a court' details how two Ottawa Superior Court Justices (both Federal Court appointees) teamed up with the Employer represented by Hicks, Morley et al to thwart the course of justice in #14-61592 in which the fraud being  asserted by me for a first time on the part of the courts as well as the Employer, was compounded by the additional compromising actions of the two judges plus Hicks, Morley et al for the Employer in that hearing.

8) There has been no reply from the legal oversight bodies nor the Ontario Appeal Court under Chief Justice Strathy where there are now three pending appeals, which appears to have gone into 'lock-down' mode with no response.

9) The PMO (the boys in short pants) rules and are accountable to no-one. The media can no longer 'get the story' so they create them e.g. 'The Rob Ford story'


11) What is needed is a political party to promote a 'Whistleblower's Rant' in which the public may write in and get publicization of their complaints e.g.

a) After 29 years and over 8 separate court systems and over 30 judges, why does a rinky dink labor case where no compensation has been paid (includes pension rights) remain unresolved?

b) Considering that the Supreme Court of Canada rejects 85% of civil issues; why did they hear a matter relating to a fine against a woman lying to a customs official on importing contraband material?

c) One rant which went viral was about the complaint against those companies adding a $2 surcharge for paper invoices.

d) 'There's law but no justice' -  newspaper editor's comment

e)  One billion dollars legal fees for the Nortel break-up!!! Balancing pensioners interests in England with share-holders rights in the U.S. has different legal systems hence an arbitrator in one month could fashion a settlement for all.

     In short, by creating a national billboard (much like a letters to the editor on the high calibre level of the National Geographics) a political Party can emulate my newsletters gaining credibility with my quotations and cartoons. Looking outward, not inward, as the Tories and NDP Parties would do, is what is necessary to breath new life into Canadian policies. For equal time, Justin Trudeau has the assets of being good looking, an excellent fund raiser, plus he is 'not Stephen Harper'. Mulcair is programmed, whether he knows it or not, to be another Harper; that is, he will reform Parliament to pass good legislation which the courts will enforce which was Harper's original intention. He now knows that Canada is well past that stage; not so Mulcair. One of the first questions that a new Prime Minister Trudeau will face will be the basic question posed by resolving the 'Employee's Case' as any new government may not move either backward, forward or even remain still until that challenge is met.





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.



1)'...What did they know, and when did they know it?' That's a question which has its origin in the Watergate scandal, 40 years ago....Most of the time, it's reporters asking The Question about politicians. In the past few days, the roles have been reversed (my underlining)...What happens next to Jian Ghomeshi is mostly up to the courts... What interests me, mostly is what happens next to the CBC...The allegations were myriad, and had been well-known for months. So, did the CBC investigate? Why not, if not? And if they did, why did they not act sooner? It's The Question, and it's one to which the CBC had better have a damned convincing answer.(If it wants to survive that is.) Tough Questions For CBC OTTAWA SUN Warren Kinsella Oct. 31-2014 p.23

2) '...It's not much ado about nothing. It's nothing being done about a great deal of things. Possibly for years...However, there is one point that works in his pseudo defence: This is too serious to leave up to the court of public opinion; it needs to get into the legal nexus and make its way to court. For everyone's sake. (...lots of luck with that one, but count me out.... RC) Ghomeshi not a lynch-mob victim Anthony Furey Ottawa Sun Nov. 01-2014 p.19

3) TV Host Larry King to Monika Lewinski...'If it had not been for the dress (with semen evidence); she had no story.'





1) The CBC answer, my dear Warren, is the West Vancouver School Board's 'Final Solution'. By corrupting the courts with carefully selected judges, anything can be achieved and is being achieved.

2) In 1986, I pulled a 'Gomeshi' by changing lawyers from the Union selected one and laying my own appeal of an obviously corrupt arbitration sanctioning my senior teacher lay-off from the West Vancouver School Board in 1985 for reasons of 'declining enrolment' (there wasn't any but a fix is a fix) PLACARD: JUSTICE SYSTEM BROKE BUT PLENTY FIXED AS IT IS

3) The Union reluctantly supported my bid (Ghomeshi should be so lucky?) with the court quashing the arbitration labeling, as it did, the government-appointed arbitrator as being 'patently unreasonable'.

4) Over 8 separate courts and over 30 judges since that time have been quite happy to leave this case in a state of 'suspended animation' which raises the question of the concept of 'resolve' as it relates to the Canadian Justice System. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. In short, that's anarchy.

5) Whether Ghomeshi is a victim or otherwise, he is being lynched in the media. Without a charge being laid (the female lawyer's public complaint whom was not raped appears 'lightweight'), the CBC has no case because they bungled the lay-off by not including a reason for the dismissal. Their hope is to influence a judge (and I can vouch how easily that can be done by an employer) with a plethora of media complaints. Senator Mike Duffy and former Tory M.P. Helena Geurgis were subjected to this type of media castration. Typical is the mish-mash of a MACLEANS article (Oct. 22-2014 p.13) - while not being inaccurate and by raising pertinent points - has created a controversy (to sell magazines) as opposed to a clear logical presentation largely due to its failure of organization. The caption could just have easily have read: 'Will this scuzzball escape justice?'

6) The only hope now is for the CBC to have a trial of Ghomeshi based on female complaints as a means of cover-up of their dismissal blunder; perhaps with a second dismissal which, in law does not expunge the first dismissal but that is where a carefully selected judge comes in....and I have had a belly-full of those 'B' level judges over the past 29 years.

7) If the CBC can get away with dismissing an employee for no stated reason, it is the end of the Unions and the collective bargaining process. No more will such as the West Vancouver School Board have to pervert the course of government (imposed BILL 35 in 1985 replicated in ON with the imposed BILL 115 in 2013) and the Justice System (gerrymandered government arbitrator later ruled 'patently unreasonable' when the arbitration favouring the Employer was quashed). I was left in a permanent state of limbo where no compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. And where are the authorities in the Justice System, media and politicians on this lead civil case in Canadian Jurisprudence? AWOL !


OCT. 28-2014 'Ghomeshi is fired by the CBC . The broadcaster issues a brief statement saying its relationship with Ghomeshi has come to an end as a result of information that 'came to our attention recently, that in the CBC's judgment, precludes us from continuing our relationship' with Ghomeshi.(my underlining). That latter part is sleazebucket legal talk designed for a sleazebucket judge - and there are plenty of both in the Justice System as I can vouch for that - for the Employer to cover its ass. The key here is what is the Union's role in this matter? Did they 'sanction' this firing leaving Ghomeshi vulnerable? 

8) A similar stunt to the firing of Ghomeshi was promulgated by West Vancouver School Trustee President, Margo Furk, in 1985 when she leaked to the press...'Why lay-off a junior teacher doing their job when a senior teacher is shown to lack 'current demonstrated ability'?' (The term was undefined in BILL 35 nor in law in general making that BILL (later withdrawn before this sole-laid case was resolved) ultra vires. If I was incompetent as she implied, then fire me where I have no recall rights as opposed to laying me off with recall rights. Of course the muddle headed media (SEE web 'Red Neck Media') never checked the figures showing that staff was added in June of 1985; not reduced with no mention of any lay-off...the Superintendent's letter of June 26-1985 (BILL 35 effective July 01-1985) to that effect was apparently bogus. I submit he committed perjury in the arbitration which was later quashed by the courts, no doubt to hide Employer culpability. (In fact, I was dismissed for 'whistleblowing' as I had evidence of a fraud against an administrator). So if the Ghomeshi case follows this sequence, he will be buried in the anti-employee media with the coup de grace administered by some judge or other. Employers are invariably excused in these matters by this rationalization: 'It was the proper thing to do but they just went about it the wrong way'. In short, innuendo is not a reason but the Canadian Justice System is too shaky to stand up to pro-Employer media pressure. (Columnist Ezra Levant of the Sun Media ( Nov.02-14 p.22) reveals some of the background CBC skulduggery but he is in a minority as columnist Michael Corin's article on the same page is typical of the attack on Ghomeshi).

9) Please do not mistake; I find the accusations against Ghomeshi most troublesome as my 'square values' do not condone such antics. However, my court experience is that any woman should think three times before going up against the 'lyin ways' of our Judicial System. For that matter, no-one can trust any longer  to the Canadian Justice System. Just read my bog on the 29 year unresolved Employee's Case as fraud keeps being heaped on fraud by the Judiciary and there is no-one to call them to account - media, professional teachers of Canada, legal fraternity, politicians...it can't get any worse than that.

10) Recently, in an earth-shattering move, I have alleged fraud on the part of 2 ON judges plus the Hicks, Morley et al Employer team, to the oversight bodies (including ON Appeal Court's Chief Justice G.R. Strathy) which is being met with nothing but silence...it's now the Canadian way for uncomfortable truths...the bureaucracies be damned.





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.



A) 'The curse of the world is not decisions taken, Blake reflected, it's the decisions shelved, bought off, sidestepped.War Dance Tim Sebastian

B) 'John 5:19  'We know that we are children of God and the whole world is under the control of the evil one...Maybe's there's just...evil in the world that even God is powerless to do anything about. And that's the real point.' Buried Secrets  Joseph Finder

C) 'Though the heavens fall, let justice be done. The Warriors  Tom Young

D) 'Judges have gone crazy in the last 30 years locking up too many people.' Interview with U.S. novelist John Grisham

E) A MORAL FABLE: The body parts were having a discussion as to who was boss. Obviously, I am claimed the bureaucratic finger for without opposable thumb-fingers, bureaucratic man could not be distinguished from the feral beasts. The legal lung department then spoke up pointing how if it were not for them sucking all the air out of the atmosphere, an ice age would ensue. The political brain pointed out that without an order from their department, nothing could transpire. And so it went, each part of the body arguing large and long as to their claim for leadership. Then the asshole Justice System spoke up...or at least tried to among the howls of laughter among the other body parts. So the judicial asshole closed down leaving the political brain to fog over, the legal lungs to collapse and the bureaucratic fingers to go limp. All of which just goes to prove, you do not need to be a political brain to be a boss, just a judicial asshole. RC  employeescasescanada.com



1) No-one appears to get it...the Justice System of Canada has collapsed.

2) For example, when -as a senior teacher in British Columbia- I was laid off under bogus conditions, the lay-off letter (June 26-1985) from the Superintendent gave the explanation that under the neophyte government's imposed BILL 35 (operant date July 01-1985) the central reason for this lay-off was due to declining enrolment. BILL 35 was withdrawn (before this sole laid case was resolved) much like Ontario's imposed BILL 115 used against Ontario's teachers in 2013 which was later withdrawn (banana republic law).

3) BILL 35 flew a false flag by including within the BILL, the additional term 'for reasons of current demonstrated ability' (cda) permitting such as West Vancouver Board Chairperson, Margo Furk, to mouth off to the media...'Why should we lay off a junior teacher who is doing his job when we have a senior teacher who lacks current demonstrated ability'? That they had to lay off any teacher was underscored by the fact that they added 16 new positions with no declared lay-off of any teacher in June of 1985. SEE web 'Red Neck Media' as to how the low brows in the media handled that stunt; much like the media is doing today in the former M.P. Helena Geurgis case, Senator Mike Duffy case, and more importantly, CBC's Ghomeshi's case. In short, the anti-employee media is up to their old stunts on which the Employer Old Boys Club depends.

4) This 'false flag' reference applies to the fact that cda is undefined in the law or elsewhere and was placed there in the case that this noxious legislation, which is ultra vires due to the inclusion of this term, was manipulated in arbitration by an arbitrator who later ruled in the favour of the Employer as he did not fear an appeal. How wrong he was when I changed lawyers from the Union appointed one.

5) Justice Southin's quashed this arbitration in 1986 noting, as she did, that the arbitrator had been patently unreasonable by failing to show why 'the enumerated factors' justified the selection of this writer for lay-off. In short, any case must link up the 'crime' with the perpetrator; that is the whole point of a court of law...or should be, but apparently no longer the case in Canada. Her Decision had the further effect of hiding Employer perjury. Conspicuous by its absence from Southin's Report is any reference to a conspiracy and the fact that BILL 35 was ultra vires (beyond the power of the judiciary). That is the real perfidy of her Decision. And a greater perfidy? This nefarious action is known to hundreds and yet no-one will speak up - it's now become the 'Canadian way' as we no longer 'stand on guard for thee'.

6) The secret memo notes she possessed which I have demanded from the Union and Employer in recent Ontario hearings are strangely lacking in evidence as word has apparently gone out to 8 different courts across Canada and over 30 judges that there must be no proper hearing of Southin's cupidity.

7) In 2004, with the Second failed Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) under the ultimate remedy label (there must be a financial remedy in the collective bargaining process), an allegation was made, for a first time of a second conspiracy relating to court processes on top of the original conspiracy involving the B.C. government, a government-appointed arbitrator, an Employer and a Union to dismiss an employee for whistle blowing.

8) The failure of the SCofC in 2004 to hear this case marks the point when Canada sank to Third World status due to this unresolved  legal case where no compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. (Without a judicial finding, as the targeted party, I was to be left in limbo.)

9) The second phase since 2004 in the Federal Court starting in 2010 and Ontario has infected those jurisdictions with the same 'ebola-like' virus which has shattered the Canadian Justice System in its entirety as revealed in previous Newsletters. The Ontario courts appear to have gone into 'shut down mode' in these later stages of examining a direct charge of fraud on the part of the courts.

10) This devastating downward slide by the law in general is characterized by the fact that while reasons were given by the Employer School Board in 1985; no such stated reason is given in such as the dismissal of CBC staffer, Gomeshi. That point has escaped the media hung up on 'what did the CBC know and when did they know it?' Employment law is based on giving a reason for dismissal; this the CBC did not do other than to note that the employer and the employee were parting ways for private reasons known only to the Employer. In short, the Justice System has moved up the false flag of cda from within the bogus BILL 35 legislation in 1985 to the false flag of innuendo in 2014 in a CBC dismissal letter as opposed to stated reasons. The precedent set by that action is for Employers to remove employees for 'reasons best known to themselves' making a mockery of employment laws. Under these conditions, it makes no sense to hold Union membership. As to the CBC; consider this piece of casuistry exposed by Sun Media's Ezra Lavant: 'All the news they (CBC) didn't fear to print' Nov. 4 p. 19 'CBC spokesperson':'...In all cases that resulted in a complaint of sexual harassment, we did an official investigation. Therefore, in any cases where the discussions were informal, there was no sexual harassment.' Similarly, as no charge of conspiracy of the court processes was examined by the SCofC in 2004, nor of the charge of fraud against judicial personnel (including 2 judges) in their recent respective written judgments in Ontario, ergo, there is no fraud as nothing is listed in the anointed Bible of the judicial record which is all the legal fraternity and apparently 35 million Canadians -1 care about. That's the essence of the duplicity of the Canadian Justice System and why it has collapsed.

11) Indeed, Ottawa legal Counsel, Howard Levitt, claims that under the collective bargaining rules, only the Union may contest a client's dismissal. The Union here is remaining strangely quiet in a matter which heralds the demise of the entire Union movement. 

12) There may be one silver lining for employers with the 'Gomeshi solution' of dismissing employees for no stated reason; namely, the elimination of all those legal billable time hours employment lawyers depend on which would carve a large dent in Canadian court operations. Hence in this strange battle, lawyers are fighting for their legal life on this one through the offices of Gomeshi and the Union. The authorities are therefore not frightened...they are terrified. An outside settlement is the only way in which the Justice System can duck this fatal bullet. Much the same conditions apply to the Employee's Case in which the Professional teachers of Canada continue to sit on their duffs and the media fiddles while the judges screw up. RC  employeescasescanada.com  


cc ScofC  Hon. M. Moldaver


November 6-2014

A day in the reading life of the Outlawed Canadian - Nov. 5 Ottawa Sun/Ottawa Citizen. While I have sent only a few letters to the Editor for both papers, both block my number (thanks to CEO Paul Godfrey & Andrew Potter respectively)

I also e-mail columnists; some reply.

SUN p.1 salacious picture of teen-age female pimp 'Her conduct is despicable. Teen pimp boss handed adult sentence for heinous crimes

me Merely free advertising for a future madame when she gets out.

SUN p.8 'The province is catering to gambling addicts' (on-line betting) Christina Blizzard '...We're heading down a dangerous road. Not only are we financially bankrupt, this government is taking us down the road to moral bankruptcy as well.'

me PLACARD: BEHIND EVERY ECONOMIC COLLAPSE IS A MORAL COLLAPSE . Now all these columnists have to do is write on the moral collapse of Ontario's Judiciary as seen in the Employee's Case.

SUN p. 18 'Harper heads to China...key currency deal.

me Is the U.S. happy with Canada accepting the yuan in trade rather than the U.S. dollar?

SUN p. 21 'Problem cultural, not legislative' Anthony Furey  me good article

'...But these days it's hard to find a politician who says "not my jurisdiction" and leaves it at that.'.... me include judges on that list

'...Society is full of jerks...But people look away because they are frightened that it is not their place...simply a reluctance to deal with the problem head on.'

me extend the cultural program in these terms. For example, pedophile complaints were ignored up to 1990; since then accused people are now on the defensive. In 1985, shooting whistleblowers (such as me) was standard fare and still is as exemplified by those women who complained about Gomeshi.

SUN p.21 'Ghomeshi scandal reveals CBC hypocrisy' Lorne Gunter 'So for the sake of their image, the CBC and a lot of their literati did what they claim to be so disgusted at the Catholic Church for-turning a blind eye to repeated, alleged sexual abuse...Please Ghomeshi enablers, no more moralizing about others.'

me So whistleblowers get shot for complaining...and not complaining PLACARD: HYPOCRISY/CANADA DOES IT BEST

SUN p. 22 'Management gravy train sucking life from employee Vera Held Make it Work '...I recommend you move on to something else quickly before this autocrat and the superficial environment he has created -sucks the life out of you.

me Does this explain how Ponzi Scheme guru, Bernie Madoff can pull off the biggest con in history? When push came to shove in 1985, I gave that Antigonean 'NO' to the despicable West Vancouver School Board and the rest, as they say, is history.

SUN p.25 'Ghomeshi one more brick in the wall' Liz Braun 'Whether you think it applies to you or not (but it does), victim blaming is an established element of how it all works, just part of the power structure....'

me 'All Hail the Old Boys Club'...that's where I obviously went wrong.

SUN p. 44 Sunshine Girl photo

me What isn't Miss March wearing? Baby bumps with possibly the exception of actor, Demi Moore, are never, ever shown. (TIP: nude photos are best with 2 months of pregnancy) Feminine pulchritude is far more fetching as even Cinderella could tell you as the cameras focus is on her and not the handsome prince. What if the ugly step sisters had been beautiful and Cinderella was uglier than sin? How's that for alternative endings? As to the Sunshine Girl? While the Sun media has become increasingly democratic, pudgy and ugly are still not an acceptable mix.


CITIZEN p. C7 OPINION Obama Inherits Bush's Legacy On Torture 'No leader of a democratic state will ever publicly condone torture. It is condemned under international law at all times and under all circumstances' Erna Paris '...International Criminal Court and the Struggle for Justice 

me Does torture work? Oh yes it does, else why use it? Torturing a wife and child in front of a target will shatter the most resilient individual. But how does the U.S. justify waterboarding one candidate a 180 times at Guantanamo?...how much information does any one person have? Recently the FBI is seeking to finalize CIA torture cases in civilian court where the Defense lawyers may not make any reference to earlier torture. It's one reason why I dropped my U.S. Newsletters for a country with its legal system intact, no matter how shaky. (Canada's legal system is not). Paris is right about U.S. sophistry claiming that the U.S. may not torture in the U.S. but may do so abroad.

CITIZEN p.7 'The Holocaust remains history's unheeded lesson' "Never again" should mean just that, writes Bernie Farber 

A 16 year old Jewish female victim's letter to her boyfriend: "When will you learn that there isn't a word for everything?'

me 1) As a History teacher on WWII, I asked students to choose a wartime novel and summarize it: e.g. Three Came Home / This Way To the Gas Chambers, Ladies & Gentlemen; otherwise students were just left with meaningless textbook figures on the Holocaust. 2) The Zionists are no fools...'Never again...to our people' They never speak out on genocide in Africa, Serbia or ISIL. 3) Education is not the answer...it is merely that we do not have any better answer.


CITIZEN (from Financial Post) 'The Ghomeshi case shows us that 'there is nowhere to hide' employment lawyer Howard Levitt(with radio program at 4 P.M. Sundays on CFRB in Toronto) Anything that damages an employer's reputation can be considered a cause for dismissal, writes employment law expert Howard Levitt

me 1) My accusations of fraud against a school administrator in 1985 was certainly going to do just that...so in Levitt's world, the West Vancouver School District had a right to hi-jack the legislature (BILL 35) and co-opt the judiciary (gerrymandered government arbitrator later ruled 'patently unreasonable' when the arbitration was quashed).

2) An earlier account by Levitt suggested that Ghomeshi probably wishes that he did not hold Union membership as only the Union may pursue matters of wrongful dismissal. Usually a private meeting is held between the Employer and Union to determine this aspect. It's a dirty little lie that the Union leaders would rather that  their clients not be made aware...'well, as long as the employer doesn't go after a Union leader....'

3) In general, a Union controls all aspects of its clientele with such as money bargaining and terms of work as this applies to all members. Levitt cites cases where private actions of an employee are subject to Union control which, I do not believe, have been tested at the Supreme Court of Canada level. My first trip on the 'universality of unions' was not heard as decided by then Chief Justice A. Lamers (d.), B. McLachlin (incumbent Chief Justice) and Justice Cory. In short, because the Union abandoned my court case, the School Board refused my tendered retirement at age 65 notice in 2006  hence I lose my pension rights (along with a lot else due to judicial chicanery. Some judges will hear a Union client apart from his Union; others (such as my case) will not. It was a major question and the SCofC ducked out knowing only too well of the considerable fall-out to the Judiciary should the 'secret memo notes' of Justice Southin in 1986 become public knowledge.

4) I also do not believe Levitt is entirely correct when he says that there are no options for a Union client. Most Unions will permit an individual to pursue a legal action at his own expense. My legal Counsel informed the Union in 1999 to either go back to arbitration or sign a final agreement with the Employer; their only two choices. They did neither as well as refused to let me pursue the matter at my own expense. The point here is that if the Union had signed their own deal, then I was in a legal position to sue the Union with the whole conspiracy being exposed...and that would never do....

5) Levitt and I would probably agree on one point: no Union client should hold a formalized arrangement with a Union. Contract out such matters as salary negotiations with members being able to apply for funding support on a case by case level for individual interests. As matters now stand, as Levitt's article suggests, the Employers may do anything hence it is a most unwise individual who ever goes to a Canadian court on any basis (or belongs to a Union)...I can vouch for that. Settle your disputes privately or on the picket line. In the CBC case, they can out-wait Ghomeshi for at least two years. Does he have the necessary private funding? That's how the Justice System works and no judge wants his Decision appealed hence the big guy wins the vast majority of the time.

6) CBC vulnerability under the Human Rights Act or Negligence claims...once again, just try and access these oversight committees although the Human Rights interests have had more success than others.

7) Signing code of conduct clauses is a little like those internet pop-ups that ask you whether 'I agree'. Everyone agrees as you will not get the service unless you do...it is legal casuistry. When I was asked, as a business operator, about the 'fine print' of a contract which the media is always advising one to read, I would reply accordingly: With any contract, any two lawyers will agree to disagree...so let's go to court with all that lovely billable time fees. So don't try to control something beyond your control. With any purchase; consider the industry...Is this Joe's Used Car Sales insisting that the word 'Honest' be placed before his name? Then consider the particular reputation of the Company e.g. Better Business reference. Then listen carefully to the major points in the contract made to you by the salesperson. Shop around if need be. The rest, as they say, is in the hands of the Gods.

8) Levitt concludes that the Ghomeshi case will create a sea change in Canadian's views toward abuse of power in the workplace and the responsibilities of everyone involved. Not likely for this message is merely designed to guarantee more billable time hours. The central message is that the Employer may dismiss anyone without a stated reason like CBC in the Ghomeshi case which is little short of anarchy leaving such as employment lawyer Levitt without any business.

9) In conclusion, some legal wag should challenge Levitt with this missive: 'Howie, you have a big set of employment balls, why don't you parse the employeescasecanada.com case on your radio show?'   You won't see him for dust as he heads for the exit doors.

10) A number of years back when I was driving the handicapped as a semi-retirement job, I was about to enter the driver's door when I stopped, stepped back a step and beckoned to a following driver to go ahead saying: "Abandon hope all ye who enter here as the Company owns your ass for the next 10 hours."

The driver was non-plused. "Well, isn't it true?"  'Yeah, but I have never heard anyone quite put it that way.'  Today, lawyer Howard Levitt is putting it that way in public.





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.


A) 'Nothing fails like success and nothing succeeds like failure...I learned two important thngs: failure isn't permanent and losing can be an essential ingredient in winning...Winning is the only way to get rid of the taste of defeat.

Ottawa Sun columnist John Snobelen  Nov. 01-14 p.19



1) The CBC is in deep trouble before an 'A list judge' with their dismissal notice of Ghomeshi lacking a stated reason which explains their appeal to the court to dismiss Ghomeshi's application for redress.

2) Similar to Hollywood and its A-list actors and its B-list ones, the Canadian Judiciary has A-list judges and B-list judges (the Employee's Case has only had 'B-list' judges...over 30 of them.)

3) An A-list judge is not going to hear the defense of CBC; merely referring to asking why they did not include any explanation for the lay-off. Hence the 'wrongful dismissal' accusation which can only be handled by the Union has no meaning as the collective bargaining rules state that a reason must be given.

4) Hence this is a dismissal for no given reason = fraud? Expect an A-list judge to recommend - not order - that CBC return employment to Ghomeshi and if they don't, the matter would be remitted to that judge to assign a settlement in the neighborhood of, say, three to five million dollars. This would give Ghomeshi leverage for an outside settlement. (Much the same happened in the Employee's Case)

5) Plan B for CBC if they cannot get the court to quash the charge, is to provide 'evidence' of any type on the stand and trust to the appointment of a B-list judge to throw their case out of court for failing to give a reason and again, recommend that CBC return employment. CBC would then proceed to fire Ghomeshi based on evidence produced in court thus supplanting the original hearing. For example, I remember the case of a teacher who won a legal case only to have the School Board dismiss him based on trial-produced evidence.

6) When I was laid-off (read that  whistleblowing)from my senior teaching position in West Vancouver in 1985 for reasons of declining enrolment (there wasn't any); I asked the union lawyer in arbitration as to why extraneous material was being introduced. He replied that a Judge would not permit material outside of lay-off numbers, but an arbitration has larger parameters.(the arbitration was later quashed by the courts citing just that explanation which, unfortunately, left me in a permanent state of limbo without any compensation (now includes pension rights) being paid. That's how not only the collective agreement was trashed, but due to judicial cupidity such as the above, the entire Canadian Justice System has collapsed.

7) Should the judge sanction the no-explanation lay-off notice, every Employer in the land will use that approach. For example, in the Employee's Case, the Employer could conceivably now dismiss me without explanation for, without an explanation, I cannot claim 'double jeopardy'. Further, without an explanation for a dismissal, School Boards may dismiss senior teachers (receiving twice the salary of junior teachers) and replace them with two junior teachers by running an end-game around the Union as well as the laws of the land.





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working as now the Canadian Justice System has been shattered in its entirety by this case.


GHOMESHI (CBC radio host dismissed for 'kinky sex')-Legal Aspects

1) In all matters such as the above, the employer contacts the Union to see if they can arrange a sweetheart deal. In short, the Union is merely out of pocket for legal costs no matter which direction a case goes and is most reluctant to defend an individual client: "Well, as long as the perp is not a union leader, I guess we can look the other way."

2) Don't worry, would be the CBC response, as we do not plan to include a reason hence the collective bargaining process is not invoked. And where is Ghomeshi able to take us on financially?

3) Therefore by laying his own action based on 'breach of contract' as opposed to 'wrongful dismissal', Ghomeshi takes the legal high ground knowing full well that an outside agreement is his only real hope...the question is how much? Further, he gets the momentum in this case which is all important in these matters when tried in the public mind of the anti-employee media.

4) The publicity here generated Union activity so that they offer to represent him although he has to drop his action at a cost of #18,000 legal fees which the anti-employee media portray as the 'beginning of the end' for Ghomeshi. In short, the media is trying this case apart from the judicial system which is typical for them.

5) The Union, to be sure, will enter into negotiations with CBC. Wrongful dismissal claims under the law are usually settled for approximately two years salary. Breach of contract conditions would be considerably more.

6) The media appear to be in love with the comments of Labour Law specialist, Howard Levitt, whom, while not incorrect, has definitions 'straight out of flight school'.

7) If this matter goes to arbitration, Ghomeshi will be screwed as the larger parameters of the case permit the CBC to enter their 'reason for dismissal' through the back door. In short, he could win only to be shafted with a second dismissal based on evidence permitted in court apart from judicial comment. If the matter proceeds to court before an honest judge, the judge will not entertain any additional evidence keeping the enquiry to a strict interpretation of why the CBC did not give any stated reason for this dismissal. In that case, the CBC would be in trouble. Note that I say an honest judge, for a dishonest judge would permit 'extenuating circumstances' to be introduced thus achieving the same outcome for the CBC as an arbitration.

8) If Ghomeshi has been charged with sexual assault on the basis of the actions of the two complainants concerned here; then there are many, many others whom should be charged.

9) What Ghomeshi hoped to achieve by providing the video of 'rough sex' was to get the CBC to condone his actions thus eliminating any future potential threat from victims. It is a little like Senator Duffy whom the Tory Party were willing to cover up his costs for $30,000 but balked when that debt totaled $90,000. Also like the Duffy case, the CBC are manipulating the paparazzi media to pillory Ghomeshi so that the case is being settled in the public eye; the processes of the court be damned.

10) The CBC erred in not turning the video over to the police before dismissing Ghomeshi.

11) PLACARD: GHOMESHI JUSTICE SYSTEM ON TRIAL in much the same sense as the U.S. Justice System in the Ferguson incident and the slaying of a black man by the police.

12) PLACARD: A LIE BY THE COMPANY IS A MATTER OF POLICY / A LIE BY THE EMPLOYEE IS GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL                                                                                                                                                           13) To be sure the police chief is playing politics too by laying the police charges so that 'he cannot comment further as the matter is before the courts'. These dated charges do not advance the current legal case for CBC...just the media....