V. Solomatenko

The applicant employee applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the respondent union.

The union argued the application was untimely and that the petition supporting it was not voluntary due to a history of employer unfair labour practices, including layoffs and contracting out, which created a chilling effect.

The majority of the Board found the application timely and the petition voluntary, noting the passage of time since certification and intervening events that could explain a change of heart.

A representation vote was ordered.

A dissenting Board member would have dismissed the application, finding the petition involuntary due to the cumulative chilling effect of the employer's prior violations of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant union applied for certification of a bargaining unit of seasonal employees at the respondent's canning operation.

The respondent argued that the number of employees at the time of the application was not representative of the peak seasonal workforce and requested a representation vote based on the 'build-up' principle.

The Board held that the employees present at the time of the application were representative of the employment environment, which was characterized by short-term employment relationships similar to the construction industry.

The Board declined to order a representation vote and granted the certificate.

Board Member Gallivan dissented, arguing that the build-up principle should apply to seasonal employment outside the construction industry.

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union applied for certification to represent employees of Canada Dry Bottling Company Ltd. in Peterborough.

The union filed sufficient membership evidence for automatic certification, but a group of employees filed a petition opposing the application.

The Board held a hearing to determine the voluntariness of the petition.

Due to a material gap in the evidence regarding the physical custody of the petition for a nine-hour period, the Board could not be satisfied that the petition was free from management influence.

The Board gave the petition no weight and granted the union's application for certification.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the respondent.

The parties partially agreed on the bargaining unit description but disputed the exclusion of 'working foremen' as managerial personnel and the inclusion of a specific employee based on hours worked.

The Board appointed a Labour Relations Officer to inquire into these disputed individuals.

The Board declined the applicant's request for a clarity note restricting the technical staff exclusion to specific classifications.

The Board found sufficient overlap between union membership cards and an employee petition opposing the union to make the petition relevant, necessitating a hearing on its voluntariness.

The matter was adjourned to hear evidence on the petition's voluntariness and newly raised allegations of misconduct by both parties.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees at the respondent's fish processing plant in Leamington, Ontario.

The respondent challenged the Ontario Labour Relations Board's constitutional jurisdiction, arguing its business was a federal undertaking under the federal fisheries or trade and commerce powers.

The Board held that fish processing is a local undertaking subject to provincial jurisdiction, as it is not an integral part of preserving fisheries as a natural resource, nor is it a core federal trade and commerce undertaking despite its extra-provincial trucking and export activities.

Finding that the union had the requisite membership support, the Board issued a final certificate.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A group of objecting employees sought to file statements of desire opposing the union after the terminal date, arguing that their original timely petition had been stolen from a company bulletin board where it was left unattended.

The Board declined to extend the terminal date, finding that leaving such a document unattended fatally tainted its voluntariness and the employees were the authors of their own misfortune.

As the union had sufficient membership support, a certificate was issued without a representation vote.