II. ANALYSIS AND DECISION
4 An application under Section 141 must meet the Board's established test before leave for reconsideration will be granted. An applicant must demonstrate "a good arguable case of sufficient merit that it may succeed on one of the established grounds for reconsideration": Brinco Coal Mining Corporation, BCLRB No. B74/93 (Leave for Reconsideration of BCLRB No. B6/93), CLRBR (2nd) 44 ("Brinco"). A prime facie case will not suffice; an applicant mus traise a serious question as to the correctness of the Original Decision.
5 We have reviewed the Original Decision, AHC's application for leave and reconsideration, and the parties' submissions in respect of both. We are not persuaded that the Original Decision is in error, or that it is inconsistent with Code principles. In our view, the conclusions drawn and declarations made in the Original Decision are consistent with Code principles and appropriate in the circumstances, for the reasons given in the Original Decision.
6 To the extent that further arguments are raised in the reconsideration application and submissions of AHC and CHC before us, we find they are answered by CMAW's arguments on reconsideration. In particular, we accept CMAW's argument that BCPC, not its individual locals, was the "affiliated union" for carpenters within AHC, and that therefore when CMAW replaced BCPC within AHC as a result of B235/2007, CMAW became the affiliated union for carpenters and took on all the rights and responsibilities of that position, including clearance and dispatch rights.
7 Although AHC's application for leave and reconsideration makes a bare assertion that the Original Decision is contrary to principles of natural justice and values expressed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it fails to provide any submissions in regard to those two assertions. In our view, therefore, it cannot be said that either of those issues are properly raised in AHC's application.
8 AHC's application raises inconsistency with Code principles as its ground for review, and provides submissions in that regard. However, for the reasons given, we find those submissions, and the supporting submissions of CHC, do not raise a serious question as to the correctness of the Original Decision. Accordingly, leave is denied and the application is dismissed.
LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD
BRENT MULLIN
CHAIR
ALLISON MATACHESKIE
VICE-CHAIR
BEVERLY BURNS
VICE-CHAIR
======
this decision in pdf format dated April 3 is available here: http://www.lrb.bc.ca/decisions/NUM2008.HTM
