Robert J. Atkinson

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

The Board examined the voluntariness of the petition signed by employees in support of the application.

The Board found that the applicant had misrepresented to employees that he had a confidential source indicating that previous benefits would be reinstated if the union was decertified, leading employees to perceive a link with management.

Consequently, the Board concluded the petition was not voluntary and dismissed the application.

A dissenting board member would have ordered a representation vote.

Following a finding that the respondent employer committed unfair labour practices by unlawfully reassigning an employee to a lower-paying position, the parties disputed the quantum of compensation.

The employer argued the employee failed to mitigate his damages by electing to take a layoff rather than accepting the lower-paying reassignment.

The Board held that given the employer's pattern of unlawful discrimination and the employee's reasonable expectation of quickly finding alternate employment at full pay, his decision to take a layoff was a reasonable attempt to mitigate his losses.

The employee was awarded full compensation for the period of his unemployment.

The union filed a complaint alleging the employer violated the statutory freeze period and interfered with the union's administration by unilaterally reducing employee hours and dealing directly with employees.

The employer, a newly acquired nursing home, implemented staffing changes resulting in reduced hours for several employees without the union's consent.

The Board found that the collective agreement did not give the employer the right to unilaterally establish new normal hours of work.

The Board held that the employer violated the statutory freeze and interfered with the union by bypassing it to deal directly with employees.

The employer was ordered to compensate affected employees.