Concerns rise for future Alberta teachers after Alberta Teachers’ Association loses injunction bid
By Emily Milligan, April 1 2026—
A key court decision has deepened the challenges facing Alberta teachers and may lead aspiring educators to think twice about building their careers in the province.
On Mar. 13, Alberta judge Justice Douglas Mah ruled against the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) interim injunction application challenging Bill 2: The Back to School Act.
Passed in October 2025, the bill ended last year’s province-wide teachers’ strike and forced 51,000 teachers back to work.
“People entering the education workforce need to understand that this particular government is prepared to override their rights,” said Jennifer Koshan, a UCalgary professor in the Faculty of Law.
Koshan raises concerns about graduating students entering unionized workplaces, saying they must “be aware” when joining these environments, as the Back to School Act signals the government’s readiness to override workers’ rights, something they may do again.
“It shows the willingness of the Alberta government to use the notwithstanding clause,” said Koshan. “This is a government that doesn’t take labour rights as seriously as it should.”
The government invoked the notwithstanding clause, also known as the “nuclear weapon” of the Charter (Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms), which shields laws from Charter challenges and overrides fundamental rights protected by the Charter.
Bill 2 imposed a collective agreement prohibiting further strikes and lockouts until Aug. 31, 2028, with penalties in place for any violations. This collective agreement mirrored a previous potential agreement that nearly 90 per cent of teachers had rejected prior to last year’s strike.
“There is a right to strike, there is a right to freedom of expression, and depriving teachers of the ability to strike by sending them back to work clearly violates those rights under normal circumstances,” said Koshan.
After the new collective agreement was imposed, the ATA launched a constitutional challenge, filing an application for an interim injunction to prevent its enforcement and other measures under the Back to School Act.
Justice Mah’s ruling on the interim injunction application was based on a three-part test.
The ATA had to prove that there were serious issues to be tried; that teachers would suffer irreparable harm if this interim injunction wasn’t granted; and that the balance of convenience favours the teachers’ position.
The ATA were able to satisfy the court on the first part of the test for an interim injunction. Yet the court found the government’s arguments stronger on the last two parts of the test.
The courts acknowledged that, while the teachers suffered harm, it was caused by the Back to School Act and not by the absence of an injunction.
Having read Mah’s rationale, Koshan explains that his decision will have huge implications province-wide, not only for parents and students but, more directly, for labour unions and unionized workplaces.
Despite this, the court’s decision does not surprise her.
“This is such a difficult test to meet,” she said. “I’m sure it was very disappointing for teachers.”
At this time, the ATA has not announced an appeal of the court’s decision denying their request for an interim injunction against the Back to School Act.
“It’s a very, very draconian step that the government took here,” Koshan says. “I think what’s of concern to other unionized workers in the province is that [the government] may do it again.”
The ATA will continue its challenge on the constitutionality of Bill 2 at a full hearing before the King’s Court Bench in September.