J. F. Davidson

The union applied for certification and invoked section 8 of the Labour Relations Act, requesting certification without a vote due to employer unfair labour practices.

During the organizing campaign, the employer laid off half the bargaining unit upon learning of the union activity.

The employer later recalled the employees and admitted the layoffs violated the Act.

The Board found that the employer's actions were a serious contravention of the Act, making it unlikely that the true wishes of the employees could be ascertained in a representation vote.

The Board also found that the union had adequate membership support for collective bargaining.

The application for certification was granted without a vote.

One Board member dissented, arguing that a supervised representation vote should have been ordered.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the respondent employer violated the collective agreement by sub-contracting earthworks to a non-union contractor.

The collective agreement prohibited engaging non-union sub-contractors effective August 1, 1987.

The Board found that the sub-contracting of phase 4 work occurred after the effective date and violated the agreement, as the prior arrangements were too tenuous to constitute an engagement before August 1.

The Board remained seized with respect to remedy.

The International Woodworkers of America (IWA) applied for certification and requested a pre-hearing representation vote.

The Canadian Paperworkers Union (CPU) filed a subsequent application by way of intervention, also requesting a pre-hearing vote.

The CPU argued that its membership support should be assessed as of its actual application date, or alternatively, that it be allowed to withdraw its request for a pre-hearing vote to convert both applications to regular applications.

The Board rejected these arguments, treating the CPU's application as having been made on the date of the IWA's original application pursuant to section 103(3) of the Labour Relations Act.

Finding that the CPU lacked the requisite 35% membership support on that deemed date, the Board dismissed the CPU's application and directed a pre-hearing representation vote between the IWA and the incumbent union.