Select August 2005 Decisions

Sobeys Capital Incorporated, BCLRB No. B197/2005
The Employer operates a grocery store in Fort St. John. The UFCW applied for certification of a unit of all employees except those in the office and the meat department...more

Compass Group Canada (Health Services) Ltd., BCLRB No. B200/2005
The HEU applied to represent employees of Compass at sites operated under the auspices of the Provincial Health Services Authority (“PHSA”)...more

Trevor J. Lowe Holdings Ltd. (Canadian Tire Associate Store) –and– UFCW Local 1518, BCLRB No. B212/2005
In this decision the Labour Relations Board found that the employer had breached the Labour Relations Code by threatening employees with dismissal for union organizing activities...more

Vieira v. Maple Ridge Teachers’ Association and B.C. Teachers’ Association et al., 2005 BCHRT 350
In this case, the Complainant had filed a human rights complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal against the Union and a number of other respondents, alleging discrimination relating to the settlement of the Complainant’s grievance. The Union applied to have the human rights complaint against it dismissed. The Human Rights Tribunal dismissed the complaint on the basis that it did not contain allegations of acts or omissions that could contravene the Human Rights Code because there was no connection between the acts alleged and any prohibited ground of discrimination. The Tribunal held that there was nothing to suggest that the Union had discriminated against the Complainant in any respect, the settlement agreement was not contrary to the Human Rights Code, and that the Tribunal will not sit in review of a union’s decision to enter into a settlement, absent some allegations of fact which could support a finding of discrimination. The Human Rights Tribunal held that proceeding with the complaint would not further the purposes of the Human Rights Code because the settlement agreement resolves the past dispute between the parties, is not itself contrary to the Human Rights Code, and the subsequent conduct complained of was undertaken in compliance with the terms of the settlement agreement. In these circumstances, it would be contrary to sound public policy to permit the complaint to proceed.

To view a copy of the decision in Adobe Acrobat format, please click here.

Select 2006 Decicions

Select 2005 Decisions

Select 2004 Decisions

Disclaimer
The material on this website is presented for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. You should seek appropriate legal advice before taking any action based on information provided through this website.