M. O. Picher

The applicant, a temporary full-time employee, filed a complaint alleging she was discharged for her union activities contrary to section 58 of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant had circulated a petition and confronted the union president regarding the union's failure to enforce preferential hiring rights for temporary employees.

The Board found that the employer was aware of the applicant's efforts to gain effective union representation and that this knowledge was instrumental in the decision to terminate her without allowing her to compete for a remaining temporary job.

The Board concluded the termination violated the Act and ordered compensation for lost wages and preferential consideration for future permanent positions.

The union applied for certification of two bargaining units: one for single-car owner-operators and one for drivers operating under the respondent's taxi company.

The Board found that the owner-operators were dependent contractors, and thus employees under the Labour Relations Act, due to their economic dependence on the respondent's financing, dispatch system, and rules.

The Board also determined that the drivers were employees of the respondent, not the owner-operators, because the respondent exercised fundamental control over their hiring, discipline, and daily work.

Finding that the respondent had committed unfair labour practices, the Board granted certification for both units under section 7a of the Act.