6-month lockout ends at Montreal's storied Queen Elizabeth hotel
A news release by the hotel says workers voted 91 per cent in favour of a new deal on Monday, after they were locked out by management on Nov. 20.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
The 950-room luxury hotel is the largest in Quebec and is known as the location for John Lennon and Yoko Ono's recording of 'Give Peace a Chance' during their 1969 bed-in.
The union — Fédération du commerce — says the deal includes a 21 per cent salary increase over four years for 600 workers, and more rules around the use of staffing agencies.
Hotel management says it will gradually restart operations this month, with full service to resume on May 26.
Story continues below advertisement
The union says a half-dozen other hotels in Quebec City, Montreal and Saguenay Lac-St-Jean, involved in the same co-ordinated bargaining, have yet to reach agreements.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
Overnight fire destroys Architectural Clearinghouse
Edmonton fire crews were busy late Wednesday battling a blaze at a used building materials warehouse off Kingsway Avenue. The fire started before 10 p.m. at the family-run Architectural Clearinghouse on 119 Street near 115 Avenue. Emergency crews found flames shooting through the roof of the business when they arrived. The Architectural Clearinghouse salvages used building materials and sells them at a discounted price. It has been around since 1988. In an interview with Global News in 2023, operations manager Brenda Erdmann explained how the business works: 'We'll go into a house that's coming down or being completely renovated and we will salvage anything that's worth salvaging.' Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'Sometimes we go into the house, sometimes the homeowner brings it to us, sometimes the contractors bring it to us.' Story continues below advertisement Some of the items have historical value, including pieces from Fort Edmonton before it did renovations. Damage to the building from the fire was severe — the roof caved in. There's no word yet on a cause but firefighters remained at the scene Thursday morning.
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
Billionaire David Thomson interested in buying Hudson's Bay charter
New court filings show a holding company owned by David Thomson wants to buy the royal charter that formed the Hudson's Bay retailer for at least $15 million and donate it to the Archives of Manitoba. The department store previously announced it would seek court approval next month to sell the charter for $12.5 million to a holding company belonging to the Weston family, which intends to donate it to the Canadian Museum of History. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy More coming.
Global News
2 hours ago
- Global News
Appeals court tosses Trump's ‘excessive' US$515M NY civil fraud penalty
A New York appeals court on Thursday threw out U.S. President Donald Trump's massive civil fraud penalty while upholding a judge's finding that he exaggerated his wealth for decades. The ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. The decision came seven months after the Republican returned to the White House. A panel of five judges in New York's mid-level Appellate Division said the verdict, which stood to cost Trump more than $515 million and rock his real estate empire, was 'excessive.' After finding Trump engaged in fraud by flagrantly padding financial statements that went to lenders and insurers, Judge Arthur Engoron ordered him last year to pay $355 million in penalties. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. The total — combined with penalties levied on some other Trump Organization executives, including Trump's sons Eric and Donald Jr. — now exceeds $527 million, with interest. Story continues below advertisement An 'excessive' fine 'While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,' Judges Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton wrote in one of several opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and he was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. 0:38 Trump posts US$175M bond in civil fraud case, halting $454M asset seizure The court, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause on any punishments taking effect. Story continues below advertisement The panel was sharply divided, issuing 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Two judges wrote that they felt New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit against Trump and his companies was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any of Trump's lenders felt cheated, they could have sued him themselves, and none did. One judge wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial began that the attorney general had proved Trump engaged in fraud. The appeals court, the Appellate Division of the state's trial court, took an unusually long time to rule, weighing Trump's appeal for nearly 11 months after oral arguments last fall. Normally, appeals are decided in a matter of weeks or a few months. James has said the businessman-turned-politician engaged in 'lying, cheating, and staggering fraud.' Her office had no immediate comment after Thursday's decision. 2:21 Trump calls civil fraud case 'disgrace,' slams judge, N.Y. attorney general Claims of politics at play Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. In a six-minute summation of sorts after a monthslong trial, Trump proclaimed in January 2024 he was 'an innocent man' and the case was a 'fraud on me.' The Republican has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Story continues below advertisement Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D. Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign.' Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defense also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued many of the case's allegations were too old, an assertion they made unsuccessfully before trial. The defense also contends James misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump and improperly policed private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. 2:57 Trump blasts civil fraud trial judge's 'Trump-derangement syndrome' State attorneys said the law in question applies to fraudulent or illegal business conduct, whether it targets everyday consumers or big corporations. Though Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, the state contends that the numbers led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. Story continues below advertisement The state has argued that the verdict rests on ample evidence and that the scale of the penalty comports with Trump's gains, including his profits on properties financed with the loans and the interest he saved by getting favorable terms offered to wealthy borrowers. Legal obstacles The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan. 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Story continues below advertisement Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims.
