The complainant union alleged that the grievor was discharged from her employment as a waitress at a Swiss Chalet restaurant because of her support for the union, contrary to section 66 of the Labour Relations Act.
The employer contended that the grievor was a probationary employee who was discharged for complaining about cleaning duties and interfering with other employees' work.
The Board found that the employer's evidence regarding the reasons for discharge was contradictory and lacked credibility.
Applying the reverse onus under section 89(5) of the Act, the Board concluded that the employer failed to prove that the discharge was not tainted by anti-union animus.
The Board ordered the grievor reinstated with compensation.
