Mark B. Coulston

The applicant trade union originally applied for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board previously determined that the work performed was maintenance work, not construction work.

The applicant requested the application be processed under the general provisions of the Act.

The respondent and objecting employees opposed this request, citing procedural fairness.

The Board found no unfairness or prejudice and, following its established practice, ruled that the application would be treated as having been made under the general provisions.

The applicant trade union applied for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent employer argued it was not an employer in the construction industry, as its painting work at petrochemical complexes was maintenance, not construction.

The Board found that the painting of existing structures for the primary purpose of sustaining and protecting operating systems constitutes maintenance work.

Consequently, the application was not properly made under the construction industry provisions.

The Board also struck out the respondent's allegations of union impropriety due to lack of particulars and rejected one membership card for failing to show a monetary payment.