R. Diotte

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

The Board first granted the applicant's request to amend its name on the application to reflect a minor change, finding it would not cause confusion.

The Board then considered whether the applicant held trade union status, given its history of name changes and charter updates.

Relying on undisputed evidence that the local had operated as a trade union for decades, represented 1500 members, and bargained collectively, the Board found it to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

As a majority of employees voted in favour of the union, a certificate was issued.

In a termination application and related unfair labour practice complaint, the union sought to introduce additional particulars concerning events that occurred after the termination application was filed, specifically the ratification of a renewal collective agreement.

The employer objected to the admission of these particulars on the basis of relevance.

The Board held that the particulars were irrelevant because the determination of whether the termination application was employer-initiated under s. 63(16) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 concerns facts existing on or before the application date.

The Board also rejected the union's arguments that the ratification vote rendered the termination application moot or warranted a fresh representation vote, noting that a renewal collective agreement is contingent upon the outcome of a timely termination application.

The particulars were struck from the pleadings.