Union certification granted; employer's suggestion of lawyer for objecting employees undermined voluntariness of anti-union petition.
The applicant trade union applied for certification.
The employer and a group of objecting employees challenged the initial certification, leading to a Divisional Court order remitting the matter to the Board.
The Board considered a statement of desire opposing the union and a counter-petition reaffirming union support.
The Board found it had jurisdiction to consider the counter-petition and that it was voluntary.
The Board held that the statement of desire was not a reliable indicator of voluntary employee wishes because the employer had suggested the name of the lawyer assisting the objecting employees.
Finding that over 55% of employees supported the union, the Board declined to order a representation vote and issued a certificate.
United Steelworkers of America v. Baltimore Aircoil Interamerican Corporation, 1982 CanLII 1013