Tony Ianuzzi

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, and the parties agreed to count nine of the 11 ballots cast.

All nine ballots were cast in favour of the intervenor union.

As not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the application for certification was dismissed.

The complainant union filed an unfair labour practice complaint under section 89 of the Labour Relations Act, challenging the validity of subcontracting clauses in the respondent union's collective agreements.

The respondent and interveners brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the complaint without a hearing.

The Board found that the complainant had previously filed an identical complaint years earlier, which had been adjourned sine die.

The Board held that the excessive delay in prosecuting the matter and the attempt to litigate the same issues in a new complaint constituted an abuse of process.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 89(4) to refuse to entertain the complaint and dismissed it, while directing the Registrar to relist the original adjourned complaint to determine its status.