W. T. Langley

The applicant union sought certification for employees of the respondent nursing home.

Following a representation vote, two employees who were on maternity leave objected that they had been omitted from the voters' list and were unable to vote.

The Board held that employees on maternity leave are eligible to vote because their prospects for continued employment are sufficiently certain.

However, the Board declined to set aside the vote, finding that one employee failed to take reasonable steps to inquire about her eligibility prior to the vote, and the other employee's ballot could not have mathematically affected the outcome.

The union was certified for the full-time bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of dependent contractors working as oil burner servicemen for the respondent.

The respondent argued the individuals were independent contractors.

The Board applied the statutory definition of 'dependent contractor' under section 1(1)(h) of the Labour Relations Act.

Finding that the contractors were economically dependent on the respondent and that their relationship more closely resembled that of an employee than an independent contractor, the Board concluded they were dependent contractors.

The matter was referred to the Registrar to schedule a further hearing regarding the voluntariness of statements of desire filed by some contractors.

The union applied for certification and filed an unfair labour practice complaint regarding the discharge of a key union organizer.

A group of employees filed a petition opposing the union.

The Board found the petition was not proven to be voluntary due to the presence of a management member during its signing, and certified the union without a vote.

Regarding the discharge, the Board found the employer proved the employee was fired for an unauthorized after-hours entry onto company property, not for his union activities.

The unfair labour practice complaint was dismissed.