Professor Christie, where did you go to high school?
Where I was born, in Amherst, Nova Scotia.

What would you consider to be the highlight of your high school years?
I know what it wasn’t. It wasn’t losing 44 to 2 to Springhill in a baseball game. I was the catcher.

How did it come to be 44 to 2?
They were good ball players and we were not. But I had a happy time in high school. I was a good student and enjoyed my teachers, and I just had a good time.

Why did you choose law?
Well, I was in political science. I thought at one point that I was going to go on and do a graduate degree in political science. The main political science professor at Dalhousie called me into his office and I told him I wanted to do graduate work, and he said, “You can’t write well enough”. And, I said, “Maybe I can learn”. He said, “I’ll tell you what you should do, and you don’t have to pay any attention to me, go to law school, learn how to write, and then go and do your graduate degree.”  I went to law school to learn how to write so I could be a political scientist. I did very well in law school and decided I was better off there than in political science.

So, that played a pivotal part in your career choice?
It did really. The other thing was that I spent my summers, before and during law school, working for Frontier College. Frontier College was founded by a labourer-teacher, and recruited university students to teach English to immigrants. You worked with them during the day and taught in the evenings. So, you had to convince people that you had something to offer them, and get them into some kind of a classroom setting and teach. I did that for three summers and a winter, and I loved it.

Is that what influenced you later in your career?
After spending two summers as a naval officer cadet, I shoveled gravel on a railway gang in Saskatchewan the summer after I graduated, and taught English to Portuguese workers at night. After I finished the undergraduate program at Dalhousie, I went up to Port Radium on the eastern shore of Great Bear Lake in the Northwest Territories. Then, after my first year of law school, I worked in a logging camp in northern Ontario. And finally, following second year, I worked on a construction site on northern Vancouver Island.

Hard work during the day and teaching at night?
I loved it. Look, I’ve been brought up in a family that were managers and owners of a factory, and I think I have some sense of what management feels and thinks. But I remember distinctly standing beside the railway track, when the train slowly went through, standing there and seeing some guy who happened to be fat, sitting and looking out at those of us working on the construction site in our sweaty clothes, and he looked so self-satisfied, and I looked at him and I thought, “I hate that bastard”, and then I thought to myself, “Well, of course there’s no reason to, but isn’t it interesting that I feel that way”. Think what you would feel if you had never had and would never have an opportunity to be him.

What did that mean to you?
I felt I can understand why working people may feel resentful about those who live a different life than they do. I think I did get a sense, through those summers, that I could have some appreciation of how both sides of the bargaining table, if you like, looked at one another and looked at life.

And you felt that you carried that understanding with you throughout your career?
I took labour law as one of my courses at Dalhousie Law School and did well in it, and I thought maybe this is somewhere I can fit.

Where did you take your post-graduate education?
I went to Cambridge University in the U.K., where I studied under Lord Wedderburn, an eminent English labour law scholar, and produced a thesis on the liability of strikers in the law of torts. I spent two years at Cambridge because it was at that time a requirement of getting a law degree there that you live for two years within a mile of Great St. Mary’s Steeple. But I had fun at Cambridge too and, by a lucky fluke, I was paired with the world singles badminton champion in a practice session against the captain of the Cambridge Blues. We won. I started my teaching career at Queen’s Law School but after four years I took a year off to get an LL.M. at Yale, where I studied under another very distinguished labour law scholar, Clyde Summers. I returned to Queen's and two years later I went back to Dal as Professor and Chair nominate of the Nova Scotia Labour Relations Board.

You’ve worn a variety of hats over the course of your career. You’ve been an academic, an arbitrator, a labour board chair, a deputy minister, amongst others. Which hat have you found most satisfying, most enjoyable?
I’m very happy to have been an academic. I love the freedom that that allows you from very early on to make your own decisions and decide how you’re going to do things. I’ve been very happy as an arbitrator. I like doing that too. I love the interaction with people.

What would be the most challenging hat that you’ve worn?
I think I found the dean’s job the most challenging. When I became a deputy minister, and made a polite request, people saluted and went off and did it. I could hardly believe it. In the academic world getting academics to do things is like trying to herd cats. Also, I found trying to be a contributing scholar is an enormously challenging job. I’ve written my share, but I found that doing something that was of any use to anybody, or any significant research and writing, was hard, hard work. I admire people who do it well enormously.

Let’s talk just for a moment about arbitration. Do you feel that the parties have lost confidence in arbitration to resolve labour and employment disputes, or do you see a bright future for arbitration?
I think it’s been a very successful aspect of the labour law and public administration in the country. I think labour arbitration is a success story. I think the fact that it has become much more mediative is a good thing, and I think that the parties have developed confidence in quite a large number of arbitrators who have matured as the system has matured. The parties trust them to the extent that they are able to bring people together on all kinds of issues. I think that’s good. I see labour arbitration right now as a mature system which has to evolve further because it has been asked to deal with some enormously complex issues, particularly in the human rights and health and disability areas. Hearings have become long, lots of the decisions are much too long, and convoluted, and all of that has created more pressure for mediated settlements, which I think is a good thing.

What needs to change in your view? Where would you like to see arbitration evolving?
I’m a bit concerned that, as arbitrators have become mediative, the parties have come to depend too much on the arbitrator to mediate and have stopped doing their own homework, that is, getting things settled before they get to arbitration, and failing to prepare the ground for arbitration carefully enough. They should do more to attempt resolution and, if that fails, they should be prepared to help the arbitrator by sharpening the issues and getting on with it. Arbitrators have to be prepared to not write enormous long screeds. I think, by and large, decisions are too long and too complicated.

Which part of the arbitration process do you enjoy the most? Do you enjoy the mediated resolution, or do you prefer the arbitrated decision?
Mediated resolution, it’s a win-win, and everybody loves you, instead of one party hating your guts, so that’s nice. Now, more than half of the cases are settled before you get to the hearing, and there’s an expectation that a good percentage of the cases that do get to arbitration will result in a mediated settlement. I’ve tried to become more active in that way in recent years as I think almost everybody has. So, I mean, if you can get a settlement, that’s great.

In the areas of labour and employment, what issues do you see emerging or already existing that are concerns to you?
I think unions protect people’s dignity in the workplace, and their right to have rights, and those rights have to be respected. I worry that the level of unionization is diminishing markedly outside the public sector.

What reason would there be for that?
Unions can’t put a wall up against the force of economics. If they demand too much, the alternative now is just too widely to move offshore, which, of course, the public sector can’t do. So, that’s why unionization is protected there, but in the private sector the economic pressures just dictate that it’s not going to be as invulnerable.

Would you say that labour-management relationships have become better or worse over time, or have they stayed pretty much the same?
I think it varies from sector to sector. I think in some ways it has become more civilized. There’s a lot of good management that has respect for basic union rights. I’ve seen significant improvement in labour relations, particularly where labour and management are in the lifeboat together.

Are you concerned about the impact of outsourcing to countries such as China or India?
I’m not naïve about the way in which the world is going, nor about the necessity for businesses, if they’re going to be competitive, to find efficient ways of doing things, using modern technology and so on. But I certainly think it’s a matter of concern, particularly if we’re not able to find areas in which we can compete, because we can be efficient, employ people and be productive and profitable.

Do you see it as a wake-up call in a way to Canada to develop more of a competitive edge itself?
I think we have to. I mean, if you‘re going to make yourself competitive by doing things like outsourcing that kind of work across the world, well, you’ve got to find your strengths and capitalize on them. I don’t know that we’ve done that particularly well.

What areas do you feel would be Canadian strengths?
When I was in government here in Nova Scotia, I heard an awful lot of talk about how we had superior education as Canadians, that we could do great things in technology. Frankly, I don’t think that is right. I mean, I think that’s a racist attitude. We have to try to capitalize on things that are unique to Canada. We’ve got natural resources, but we can’t just be “hewers of wood and drawers of water”. I’m very attached to what Canada offers that’s good in life, and I think we have an attractive place for people to come and work, and if we can provide that kind of good living environment, we may be able to prosper by virtue of people wanting to live here.

Now, with elections going on in both the U.S. and Canada, what is your perspective on what’s happening in the U.S.?
I think that this Sarah Palin thing is just appalling. I think it’s just absolutely appalling that she would appeal to a large part of the electorate. Because she’s unqualified, because she’s a believer in what I think to be absurd things, and because she has no sense of her own limitations. I don’t condemn the woman for that, but I condemn an electorate that is so ignorant that they think that the ideal person to run the government is somebody who is like them. I’m not particularly attracted by McCain, because he’s too conservative for me, but McCain has some things to be said for him. I mean, he’s more attractive than some other politicians we’ve seen in power recently. But the whole idea that Palin would be a drawing card is appalling, I think.

Now, what about the Obama-Biden ticket, do you have any feelings about that?
I think, if the Americans don’t elect him, they will have missed a major turning point in their history and development. It would just be a huge step forward for them. The American racial divide is just a huge problem that their history has saddled them with, and they’ve got to solve it, and they’ve got a chance here to take a major step forward, and I hope they do.

Which of your parents do you believe had the biggest influence on you?
I was very close to both of them, but I think probably my mother had the greater influence. Well, she was just a very strong personality, and, you know, she had a Master’s degree. My father didn’t have a college education. While I spent a lot of time with him doing the things that he loved to do, and I loved to do, like outdoor stuff, hunting and fishing and that kind of thing, she was the one who was interested in school work.

If you were stranded on a desert island with three people, and these are either past or present people, other than family or personal friends, who would you like to spend time with, and why?
Abraham Lincoln. He had a great sense of humour, he was a wonderful story teller, he was a terrific listener, he had all kinds of fabulous thoughts, without being self-important or pretentious. Also John Mortimer who wrote Rumpole of the Bailey. He was a guest speaker at Dalhousie law school when I was Dean, so I got to have lunch with him. I’ve read everything he’s written, and there are autobiographical books out there. He was most entertaining. He wasn’t a criminal lawyer, he wasn’t Rumpole, but he imagined Rumpole. And, finally, Robert Stanfield, the former Premier of Nova Scotia and federal Tory leader, whom I met on several occasions. The man had a really dry wit, a marvelous dry wit, and I found him an engaging conversationalist. He was no Abraham Lincoln, but he was a bit Lincolnesque. I think he had wonderful insights, and he was just a morally fine person.

You’ve chosen three people who sound as though they share some common traits. What would you say those traits would be?
They all have a good sense of humour. I would be laughing. I don’t know whether I could make them laugh.

What would be the three most important lessons in life that you believe you’ve passed on to your own children?
My youngest, when he had come back from an academic year in France and was looking for a job in Nova Scotia, said to me that he had read that there were very few jobs and people were having a great deal of trouble getting them. I said to him, and it wasn’t the first time I said it, or the last time, as he reminds me, I said “You’re not a statistic”.

Did that help in his job search?
He got a job. Has ever since. A good one. My children are more than just mere statistics. They’re individuals and they don’t have to be governed by the times and tides. They can take control.

What two other important lessons do you feel that you’ve contributed or passed on to your kids?
An aversion to intolerance. I think they’re willing to accept people’s differences, give people a chance, however they may come across at first, or whatever may appear on the surface.

Any other lesson that you feel you may have helped them with?
Well, I think they all like having fun.

Speaking of enjoyment, what kind of sports do you enjoy?
Well, at this age and stage, I’m a poor golfer but a bit of a golf fanatic. I’m a card player, I love playing bridge, and belong to a poker group. I like the fellowship, and I don’t gamble for stakes that cost you more than a pleasant evening out. I like friendly competition, I guess. I find that at the card table, where I’m not very good, and I find that on the golf course, where I’m not very good. I’m a big fan of people picking up things early on that they don’t have to stop doing when they’re 25. I think that’s nuts. As a kid, I played baseball and soccer, but I played squash all my life up until five years ago.

Do you like to win?
Well, I try to win. People tell me I’m competitive. I like playing with people who are also trying to win. The last thing I want to do is anything with anybody who doesn’t care.

What turns you off?
Pompous, self-important people would be a definite turn-off.

If you could do it all over again in another job or profession, or with perhaps a different talent or skills, what would it be?
I would be an opera singer.

Does that mean you currently sing only in the shower?
It means I can’t sing a note. I’d like to be a good enough singer that I brought a lot of pleasure to a lot of people.

Do you have any favourite countries that you’ve visited in the past?
My wife is Dutch and we’ve spent a great deal of time in Holland. I go over for a month every year and have taught there for the last 10 years. I’ve become very attached to Holland. I love their attitude, live and let live, the tolerance and the liberality. I mean, I just find it’s a liberal, tolerant country, and from a practical point of view, everybody speaks English.

Would you consider yourself an introvert or an extrovert?
I don’t think I’m an introvert.

What about your day-to-day outlook? How would you describe yourself?
I’m an optimist.

During your lifetime, what would you say would be the most significant change in your attitude or position?
Over time I’ve become more liberal. I’ve lived through the feminist revolution and have come to embrace that. My tolerance has increased.

I understand you own property in Arizona. What’s the attraction?
Golf and weather. In the past few years, we’ve gone down for two months, March and April. We hope to spend four months in the future.

How did you come by the name of Innis?
It’s a family surname.

Do you know the history behind it?
Yes. I don’t know whether you’re familiar with the bride ships that came out from Scotland in the 19th century. Several came to Pictou, Nova Scotia, and they brought young women who were of good class but were down on their luck a little bit, and they came out with pre-arranged marriages. There were two Christie men who rode on horseback from Cumberland County to Pictou to pick up their brides. The Innis family later died out in Scotland, and an ad was placed in various Commonwealth newspapers asking for anybody who thought they had a claim on this Innis fortune to stand and be heard. So, to prove their connection, the Christie family in Cumberland County, Nova Scotia gathered up what they had in terms of family silver with the Innis monogram on it, and hired a lawyer to go over to Scotland and press their claim, which he did unsuccessfully. Unfortunately, the story goes, all the artifacts were swept overboard in a storm at sea. There was one little spoon that didn’t make the voyage, it had the Innis monogram on it, but it had a defect in the bowl of the spoon, so they didn’t think it was appropriate to send it, and it came into my possession because I had the name several generations later. Unfortunately, in the only break-in we have ever had in our home, it was taken. I didn’t give a damn about another single thing that went, but I sure did about that.

Looking back over the span of your adjudicative career, does any case bring a smile to your face?
A case I heard as chair of the Nova Scotia Labour Relations Board was not without its humour. It involved an unfair labour practice charge, a claim by an employee that he was fired because he was a union activist on some fishing boats that were run out of Prince Edward Island. The employer claimed that he was not fired because he was a union activist, but because he was a whistleblower – a matter over which we had no jurisdiction – and he had been fired because he revealed that the boat was fishing with mesh nets that caught smaller fish than were allowed by the regulations. On top of this, the employee was the proverbial rowdyman, straight out of a Newfoundland story, a real roister-doister. The first thing the lawyer asked him was: “Where were you two weeks ago?”  The rowdyman said: “In jail.”  But then the lawyer proceeded to paint a very skillful picture of him as just a lovable rowdy. The other funny thing about that case was that the shore captain for the company, the senior man next to the owner, was the rowdyman’s brother. After an adjournment, the shore captain resigned and went over to the union side. Of course, the employer was then in a bit of a spot, because now the rowdyman’s brother testified as to what the owner had told him about getting rid of the rowdyman. The funniest moment in the hearing came at the end when a foreman was asked:  “What did you say to him when you dismissed him?”  And he said:  “Boy, big nuts says you gotta go.”

Professor Innis Christie, Q.C.

Professor Innis Christie, Q.C., one of Canada's most respected labour arbitrators, is the 2008 recipient of the University of Toronto Bora Laskin Award for Outstanding Contributions to Labour Law in Canada.

Professor Christie was born and raised in Nova Scotia where he studied political science and then law at Dalhousie University. He subsequently received an LLB in Public Law, a Diploma in Comparative Legal Studies from Cambridge University (1964) and an LLM from Yale University (1969).

Professor Christie started his academic career at Queen's University in 1964, where he completed the classic book on "The Liability of Strikers in the Law of Torts", the continuing importance of which is demonstrated by references in recent Supreme Court decisions on picketing.

In 1971 Professor Christie returned to his native Nova Scotia and to Dalhousie Law School where he taught full-time until his 'retirement' in 2003, and then part-time until 2007. During this period he was a Visiting Professor at the University of Victoria, British Columbia, at Leuven University, Belgium, and at Vreij University, Holland. He served as Dean of the Dalhousie Law School from 1985-1991.

Professor Christie's devotion to law is evident in the breadth of the areas of jurisprudence which he has taught, which range from labour and employment law through poverty law, municipal law, and administrative law, to contracts, commercial law, and professional ethics.

In law reform Professor Christie has also taken a leading role: he wrote for the Woods Task Force on Labour Relations in Canada in 1967, drafted the Nova Scotia Trade Union Act in 1972 (with Dr H.E. Read) and the Nova Scotia Labour Standards Code in 1972. For a number of years he played a central role in the national Labour Law Casebook Group.

Professor Christie taught the first law school course in employment law in the early 1970s, and this experience led to what may be his most important academic contribution, "Employment Law in Canada," now edited by Professor Geoffrey England, which remains the leading text in that field.

In measuring Professor Christie's impact on labour law in Canada these academic contributions are, however, inseparable from his parallel career as a leading arbitrator and tribunal adjudicator. In this regard, Professor Christie has served in the 1970s as a Member of the Canadian Anti-Inflation Appeal Tribunal (1976-1980), Counsel to the Nova Scotia Labour Standards Tribunal (1972-1980), and Chair of the Nova Scotia Labour Relations Board (1972-1979). More recently, he was Deputy Minister in the Nova Scotia Department of Labour (1993-1994), and a Member (from 1995), then Chair (1996-2001), of the Nova Scotia Workers' Compensation Board. Professor Christie has also been a part-time member of the federal Public Service Staff Relations Board, and of the Canadian Human Rights Commission Tribunal.

Since 1965 Professor Christie has been a leading labour arbitrator across a wide range of industries, in the public sector, and in universities. He is on numerous panels of arbitrators, including, since 1973, the national panel for Canada Post and CUPW. In addition to his active rights arbitration practice, he is occasionally an arbitrator in interest disputes or chair of conciliation boards. Professor Christie's decisions are widely reported in labour arbitration reports, and he has been a member of the National Academy of Arbitrators since 1975 and a Queen's Counsel since 1991.