Related employer declaration denied where union did not represent employees and no work was siphoned.
The applicant union sought a declaration under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act that the respondent companies constituted one employer.
The respondents conceded the statutory prerequisites were met but argued the Board should exercise its discretion not to make the declaration.
The Board found that while the companies were under common control, the unionized company was largely inactive and there was no siphoning of work from the unionized enterprise to the non-union one.
Furthermore, the union did not represent any of the employees of the non-union company at the time the voluntary recognition agreement was signed.
The Board declined to exercise its discretion to make the declaration and dismissed the application.
Ontario Sheet Metal Workers Conference Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 269 v. Gerald Davidson Plumbing & Heating Limited, 1984 CanLII 934