C. I. Abbass

During a hearing regarding allegations of bad faith bargaining, the company's counsel sought to use a court reporter to record the proceedings.

The union objected, arguing it diminished the Board's control and prejudiced the union.

The Board ruled that the company could use a court reporter, but the transcript would not be the official record.

The Board further ordered that if the company's counsel intended to refer to the transcript during the hearing, they must notify the other parties and provide copies to the union and the Board at the union's and company's respective expenses.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging that the responding trade union breached its duty of fair representation under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act by failing to take his discharge grievance to arbitration.

The applicant had been terminated for alleged poor work performance and sleeping on the job.

The union relied on a legal opinion to decide against arbitration, but the Board found that the union representative failed to provide counsel with all relevant information and failed to properly consider the possibility of obtaining a lesser substituted penalty.

The Board concluded that the union's decision was arbitrary and in bad faith, thereby breaching section 69.

The issue of remedy was remitted to the parties.

The applicant employee sought to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights under sections 57 and 60 of the Labour Relations Act.

The bargaining rights derived from a voluntary recognition agreement, and no collective agreement had been signed.

The Board dismissed the section 57 application, ruling that certification is a pre-condition to such an application.

Regarding the section 60 application, the Board found that the union was entitled to represent the employees at the time the voluntary recognition agreement was entered into, as the membership cards submitted were sufficient evidence of majority support.

The application was dismissed.