Jenna Cameron and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 5483 v Wynn Park Villa Limited

LB-1909

2022 NSLB 11

ORDER

LABOUR BOARD

Nova Scotia

BETWEEN

Jenna Cameron and Canadian Union of Public

Employees, Local 5483

- Complainants

-and-

Wynn Park Villa Limited

- Respondent

NATURE OF MATTER

Complaint of Unfair Labour Practice under

Section 53 of the Trade Union Act

DATE OF FILING

BEFORE

May 7, 2021

E.A. Nelson Blackburn, Q.C., Vice-Chair

Tom Patterson, Employee Member

Gordon MacLean, Employer Member

REPRESENTATIVES

Susan Coen and Jason Edwards, for the

Complainants

Bradley Proctor and Jennifer Singh, for the

Respondent

CASE MANAGEMENT DATES

May 25, 2021

DATES AND PLACE OF HEARING

June 2, 3, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, July 2, 7, 9 and 12,

2021 Remote Hearing (via videoconference); June

30, 2021 (scheduled but not held)

ORDER

The Board declares that the termination of Tevin

Crawford was not contrary to the Trade Union

Act, as described in the reasons that follow.

The Board declares that Wynn Park Villa Limited

has engaged in unfair labour practices contrary to

the Trade Union Act, as described in the reasons

that follow. Wynn Park Villa Limited is ordered to

cease and desist such conduct, as also described

in the reasons that follow.

The Board orders, in accordance with the reasons

that follow, that the result of the vote held on

March 26, 2021, be set aside and orders a new

certification vote be held. The Board also directs

that the employees eligible to vote in the new

certification vote are those employees agreed

between the Union and the Wynn Park as being

eligible to vote in the Vote Agreement and who

are also still employees of Wynn Park at the date

of the second vote.

Further, as described in the reasons that follow,

the Board retains jurisdiction regarding remedies

relating to Ms. Nielsen, Ms. Beaver, Ms. Rafuse

and Ms. Waldron and to address issue that arise

concerning the implementation of this decision.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

[1]

This matter addresses five unfair labour practice complaints arising out of an application

for certification filed by Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 5483 (“CUPE” or “the

Union”) pursuant to Section 23 of the Trade Union Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 475 (the “Act”)

on March 19, 2021 in relation to employees at Wynn Park Villa Limited (“Wynn Park” or

“the Employer”); Labour Board file reference LB-1864 (“the Certification”) (“the

Complaints” or the “ULPs”).

[2]

The Complaints were filed with the Board as follows:

1.

Labour Board File LB-1867 (also referred to as “ULP 1” or “ULP 1867”):

Complaint under Sections 53(1), 53(3) and 58(1) of the Act

Date filed: March 26, 2021

Complainant: CUPE, Local 5483

Respondent: Wynn Park Villa Limited

Names of Aggrieved Person(s): Elaine Nielsen (“Ms. Nielsen”), Leslie (Joy)

MacKenzie (“Ms. MacKenzie”), Shalene Rafuse (“Ms. Rafuse”), and Jennifer

Beaver (“Ms. Beaver”); other employees of the Respondent Employer whom the

Employer (or persons on its behalf) have spoken to/asked about union activities;

CUPE and its local 5483.

2.

Labour Board File LB-1869 (also referred to as “ULP 2” or “ULP 1869”):

Complaint under Sections 53(1), 53(3) and 58(1) of the Act

Date filed: April 1, 2021

Complainants: Tevin Crawford and CUPE, Local 5483

Respondent: Wynn Park Villa Limited

Names of Aggrieved Person(s): Tevin Crawford (“Mr. Crawford”); other employees

of the Respondent Employer who became fearful of being known as union

supporters; CUPE and its Local 5483.

3.

Labour Board File LB-1882 (also referred to as “ULP 3” or “ULP 1882”)

Complaint under Sections 53(1), 53(3) and 58(1) of the Act

Date filed: April 27, 2021

Complainants: Tevin Crawford and CUPE, Local 5483

Respondent: Wynn Park Villa Limited

Names of Aggrieved Person(s): Tevin Crawford; other employee of the

Respondent Employer whom the Employer (or persons on its behalf) have spoken

to/asked about union activities, intimidated, discriminated against, or otherwise

treated in violation of the Act, particularly s. 53(3)(a) and (e); CUPE and its local

5483.

4.

Labour Board File LB-1909 (also referred to as “ULP 4” or “ULP 1909”)

Complaint under Sections 53(1), 53(3) and 58(1) of the Act

Date filed: May 7, 2021

Complainants: Jenna Cameron and CUPE, Local 5483

Respondent: Wynn Park Villa Limited

Names of Aggrieved Person(s): Jenna Cameron (“Ms. Cameron”); employees of

the Respondent Employer, such as Morgan Macumber (“Ms. Macumber”), whom

the Employer (or person on its behalf) have spoken to/asked about union

activities, intimidated, discriminated against, used undue influence upon, or by

any other means treated in violation of the Act, particularly s. 53(3)(a) and (e);

CUPE and its local 5483.

5.

Labour Board File LB-1910 (also referred to as “ULP 5” or “ULP 1910”)

Complaint under Sections 53(1), 53(3) and 58(1) of the Act

Date filed: May 7, 2021

Complainants: Shalene Rafuse and CUPE, Local 5483

Respondent: Wynn Park Villa Limited

Names of Aggrieved Person(s): Ms. Rafuse; other persons employed by the

Respondent Employer whom the Employer (or persons acting on its behalf) have

spoken to/asked about union activities, intimidated, discriminated against, used

undue influence upon, or by other means treated in violation of the Act,

particularly s. 53(3)(a) and (e); CUPE and its local 5483.

[3]

A Case Management Conference (“CMC”) was held by the Board with CUPE and the

Respondent on April 13, 2021, to discuss ULP 1 and ULP 2 and how those matters would

proceed before the Board. A subsequent CMC was held on April 20 when the Union and

the Respondent let the Board know that they had agreed, as part of a settlement

concerning the Certification, ULP 1 and ULP 2 (“the Vote Agreement”), that if the

Certification was unsuccessful (following the counting of the representation vote) they

would agree to attempt mediation, but if that was not successful, the Union wished to

proceed to a hearing in relation to ULP 1 and ULP 2. The Union also confirmed that if the

certification was unsuccessful, the Union would pursue remedial certification as well as

the other remedies requested in the complaints. Further discussion on ULP 1 and ULP 2

was therefore deferred pending the outcome of the vote count in relation to the

Certification. The vote count took place on April 21, 2021, and the outcome was that the

Certification was not successful. Given that ULP 1 and ULP 2 remained to be determined

by the Board, the Certification was placed in abeyance until the Board could determine if

the result of the vote count was determinative of that application.

[4]

Further CMCs were held on April 27 and May 25 to discuss next steps, possible hearing

dates and any relevant filing deadlines and at the CMC on May 25, counsel for Union put

forward a motion that the ULPs be heard at the same time. The Board heard from the

parties on this motion and decided to hear ULPs in one hearing as they arise out of similar

fact situations in relation to the Certification and the Union’s requested remedy for

remedial certification. Initial hearing dates were set down for a video hearing on June 2,

3, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 30 and July 2, 2021, and the Board made a preliminary procedural

order pursuant to Rule 11.06 of the Board’s Rules of Procedure to consolidate the

Complaints and hear them together. The June 30 hearing date was subsequently released

after the Board identified a scheduling conflict and at the video hearing on July 2,

subsequent hearing dates were set down for July 7, 9 and 12.

[5]

[6]

Between the parties, there were 21 witnesses called over the 11-day hearing, which was

carried out via Microsoft Teams, an online virtual conferencing platform. There were

numerous exhibits filed, some of which were provided in advance of the hearing and

many which were introduced during the hearing.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties were directed to provide written closing

submissions. The Board ruled that closing arguments, including the reply filed by the

Union, would form part of the record of the hearing. In addition to the closing arguments

and reply, the original complaints and reply thereto, and also pre-hearing briefs, will form

part of the record. The Union provided their written closing submissions and authorities

on July 22, the Respondent on August 5 and the Union filed a written reply on August 12,

2021.

[7]

[8]

Mr. Proctor argued at the hearing an abuse of process in relation to ULPs 3, 4 and 5, as

they were filed by the Union subsequent to the Vote Agreement at the time the vote was

taken with respect to ULP 1 and ULP 2. The Board will address Mr. Proctor’s argument

later in this decision

The Union’s position is that Wynn Park violated the Act by interfering with the

certification vote, the details of which are set out in the ULPs. The Union is requesting

remedial certification under Section 29(9) of the Act, which would replace the final vote

with an order certifying the union as a bargaining agent for the employees of Wynn Park.

In the alternative, the Union is requesting an order authorizing a new vote. Specifically,

the Union is requesting the following remedies (Union Post-Hearing Brief, Page 75):

1. Certification under s. 25(9).

 Alternatively, another vote (which the Union says would not be an

adequate remedy).

2. Remedies for particular individuals:

1.

2.

3.

Tevin Crawford

Shalene Rafuse

Elaine Nielsen, Jennifer Beaver and Beverley Waldron.

3. A range of other general remedies as stated in the complaints.

4. Conditions with Remedial Certification

5. That the Board retain jurisdiction regarding remedy and implementation.

[9]

It is Wynn Park’s position that the ULPs have not been substantiated and that the Union

has not provided evidence or proof of interference. Wynn Park requests that ULPs 3, 4

and 5 be thrown out on the basis that they are an abuse of process. In the alternative,

Wynn Park states that if there was a violation of the Act, the Unions request for remedial

certification is not appropriate. Wynn Park also requests that, if the ULPs are dismissed,

a time bar of 12 months be ordered in respect of the Certification.

[10] The relevant sections of the Act are section 25 (9); section 53 (1) and (3); section 58 (1)

which state as follows:

Certification of bargaining agent

25 (9) Where, in the opinion of the Board, an employer or employer’s

organization has contravened this Act or regulations made pursuant to

this Act in so significant a way that the representation vote does not

reflect the true wishes of the employees in the bargaining unit

determined to be appropriate for collective bargaining, and in the

opinion of the Board the applicant trade union, at the date of the filing

of the application for certification, had as members in good standing not

less than forty per cent of the employees in the unit, the Board may, in

its discretion, certify the trade union as bargaining agent of the

employees in the unit.

….

Prohibited activities of employer

53 (1) No employer and no person acting on behalf of an employer shall

(a) participate in or interfere with the formation or administration of a

trade union or the representation of employees by a trade union; or

(b) contribute financial or other support to a trade union.

….

(3) No employer and no person acting on behalf of an employer shall

a)

refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person or

otherwise discriminate against any person in regard to

employment or any term or condition of employment, because

the person

(i)

(ii)

is or was a member of a trade union,

has been expelled or suspended from membership in a

trade union for a reason other than a failure to pay the

periodic dues, assessments and initiation fees uniformly

required to be paid by all members of the trade union

as a condition of acquiring or retaining membership in

the trade union,

(iii)

otherwise participate in a proceeding under this Act

(iv) has made or is about to make a disclosure that he may

be required to make in a proceeding under this Act,

has testified or otherwise participated or may testify or

(v)

has made an application or filed a complaint under this

Act

(vi)

has participated in a strike that is not prohibited by this

Act or exercised any right under this Act.

….

Intimidation respecting union membership

58 (1) No person shall seek by intimidation or coercion to compel a

person to become or refrain from becoming or to cease to be a member

of a trade union or an employers’ organization.

Hearsay Evidence

[11] There was a preliminary motion at the hearing regarding hearsay evidence. The Board

ruled that if there is direct evidence to support the hearsay evidence then the appropriate

weight would be given to it, otherwise it is disallowed.

Witnesses

[12] The Board notes that there were several individuals who were not called as witnesses but

whose evidence could have been of assistance in this matter. As the individuals in

question could have been called by either party, the Board puts no weight on the fact that

those individuals were not called. Accordingly, the Board takes no adverse inference

against either party for not calling witnesses.

Un-Contradicted Facts

[13] While there are several facts to which the parties disagree, the basic elements of the

situation giving rise to the ULPs are not in dispute. The following list represents those

areas where the parties appear to be in agreement:

 Wynn Park is a privately owned, government funded nursing home

and residential care facility, located in Truro, Nova Scotia which

was opened in June 2008. There is space for 60 residents.

 There are 5 managerial staff at Wynn Park:

Sheila Peck (“Ms. Peck”), Administrator

Marc Thody (“Mr. Thody”), Director of Support Services

Cassie Blois (“Ms. Blois”), Human Resources Manager

Brittany Thody (“Ms. Thody”), Director of Finance

Teresa McEwen (“Ms. McEwen”), Director of Care

 Wynn Park is a family own and operated business, with various

employees having family connections to other employees.

Examples of those relationships include Mr. Thody being married

to Ms. Thody, Ms. Thody being the daughter of Ms. Peck, Madison

Murphy and Megan Murphy being the daughters of Ms. McEwen,

and Megan Murphy being engaged to Ms. Peck’s son, Ryan

Barnett. There may be other relationships that were not

referenced during the course of this matter.

[14] The following outlines some of the significant events that were identified by the parties

and/or the witnesses:

 February 24, 2021 - A meeting took place between Ms. Peck, Ms.

Blois and Mr. Crawford regarding employees’ safety concerns at

the East Unit nurses’ station. There were several other employees

present, at time, during the conversation but no one else was

present for the whole conversation. During the discussion there

were options discussed to address the concerns but there was no

agreement on what was to be done.

 February 26, 2021 – Mr. Crawford is terminated from his position

at Wynn Park.

 March 2, 2021 – Rank and File article comes out, which discusses

the termination of Mr. Crawford and included quotes from Mr.

Crawford from an interview that was done with him.

 March 4, 2021 – Ms. MacKenzie was provided a letter from Wynn

Park from Ms. McEwen and that Ms. MacKenzie asked who would

be able to join the union. Ms. MacKenzie also acknowledged that

she did not have an email address at that point, which Wynn Park

points to as the reason for her being given the letter in person.

 March 5, 2021 - The Union organized a car rally to take place

outside of Wynn Park. In attendance were members of the Union,

including Govind Rao (“Mr. Rao”) with a van equipped with a PA

system, and members from other unions.

 March 16, 2021 - The parties both agree that a meeting took place

between Ms. Peck and Dianne Vaughan (“Ms. Vaughan”), although

there is no agreement on the content or purpose of that meeting.

 March 19, 2021 – Application for Certification was filed by the

Union with the Labour Board.

 March 21, 2021 - There was a meeting between Ms. McEwen and

Ms. Beaver about alleged complaints about Ms. Beaver sending

messages to other employees about the Union.

 March 21, 2021 – There was a Union meeting for employees to ask

question and discuss the upcoming vote, at the Best Western in

Truro, NS.

 March 22, 2021 – The Labour Board gave Wynn Park notice of the

upcoming vote.

 March 26, 2021 - Voting by the employees of Wynn Park took

place.

 March 26, 2021 – Union files ULP 1.

 April 1, 2021 – Union files ULP 2.

 April 7, 2021 - There was a meeting held with Denise MacKenzie,

Ms. McEwen, Ms. Beaver, Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Waldron.

 April 7, 2021 – Wynn Park files response to the Application with

the Labour Board.

 April 9, 2021 – Wynn Park files reply to ULP 1.

 April 13, 2021 – Wynn Park files reply to ULP 2.

 April 16, 2021 – Union files response to Wynn Park’s response to

ULPs 1 and 2.

 April 20, 2021 – Union and Wynn Park enter into Vote Agreement.

 April 21, 2021 – Certification vote counting takes place. 88 eligible

votes are cast – 42 votes in favour of certification, 46 votes against

certification.

 April 25, 2021 - Lisa Burris (“Ms. Burris”) resigned from her position

at Wynn Park. At some time previous to that, she spoke with Mr.

Rao about her employment at Wynn Park, although what was

discussed is not agreed to between the parties. It was asserted by

Wynn Park, and confirmed by Mr. Rao, that ULP 3 was filed by the

Union in relation to alleged events involving Ms. Burris but Ms.

Burris did not approve of the information included in ULP 3 and

stated that it was untrue. Mr. Rao further confirmed that he signed

the Statutory Declaration associated with ULP 3, despite not being

present for the events outlined, and that he refused Ms. Burris’

request for him to retract ULP 3. He also testified that he did not

provide any clarification to the Board about his personal

knowledge of the information that he swore the Statutory

Declaration about or that Ms. Burris took issue with the accuracy

of the information or that she wished to have it retracted.

 April 27, 2021 – Union files ULP 3.

 May 4, 2021 – Employers files reply to ULP 3.

 May 7, 2021 – Union files ULP 4 and 5.

 May 18, 2021 – Wynn Park files reply to ULPs 4 and 5.

 The parties agree that Ms. Peck spoke with Ms. Nielsen on 2

different occasions, and while there is no agreement on the

content of the first conversation, it is agreed that union issues,

specifically the Rank and File article and the circumstances

surrounding Mr. Crawford, were discussed.

Union’s Facts

[15] The Union contends that Wynn Park noted a push against unionization as far back as the

first general meeting with the staff, before Wynn Park officially opened and relies on the

affidavit and oral evidence of Ms. Beaver to support this position. This point was testified

to by James Moore (“Mr. Moore”) and Ms. Vaughan as well.

[16] Mr. Crawford testified that he disclosed the issues that he had with his previous employer

during the interview process with Ms. McEwen and believed that Ms. Blois was only

present for a portion of the interview

[17] Ms. Vaughan testified that she raised concerns with Ms. McEwen at the Supervisor staff

meeting the morning of March 16, 2021, about Ms. Peck coming onto units to speak with

employees privately, as it was intimidating. Ms. Vaughan stated that in the afternoon of

that same day Ms. Peck met with her in the adult day room and warned her that she had

to support management and told that she was to pretend that the conversation never

took place. Ms. Vaughan testified that during the meeting there was no discussion of her

performance or the need to leave the adult day room and go on the floor.

[18] Ms. Nielsen testified that, after returning from a leave of absence, she spoke with Ms.

Peck on February 25, 2021, regarding safety issues associated with moving residents and

that the conversation turned to union activities, during which Ms. Peck asked questions

about who was involved with union activity, the interest in bringing a union into Wynn

Park etc.

[19] The Union states that there were 91 total votes cast, with 2 envelopes having being

mislabeled and 1 vote being cast by Mr. Crawford, which was left unopened as the parties

agreed, as per the Vote Agreement, that his vote would not be counted. Therefore, the

Union claims that if all three of those votes had been votes in favour of unionization the

vote would have been 45 in favour and 46 against (Union Post-Hearing Rebuttal Brief –

Page 2).

[20] The Union argues that Wynn Park’s allegation, as referenced on paragraph 45 of its Post-

Hearing Brief, that complaints had been made about Mr. Crawford by Ms. Waldron, Ms.

Beaver and Ms. Nielsen, is unfounded and incorrect. It bases that on the fact that Wynn

Park did not cross-examine any of those individuals about the alleged complaints and

Wynn Park witnesses did not address them directly.

Wynn Park’s Facts

[21] To begin, Wynn Park states that they called 9 witnesses, including Ms. Vaughan (recalled)

and Lisa Smith (“Ms. Smith”), who were not included in the Union’s list of witnesses.

[22] Wynn Park refers to the testimony of Ms. Peck, Mr. Thody and Ms. Blois, who all stated

that they were not aware of previous attempts to unionize at Wynn Park and confirmed

that no employee, to their knowledge, had been terminated for comments or actions

relating to unionization.

[23] Ms. Blois and Ms. McEwen both testified that they were present for the complete

interview on May 1, 2019, of Mr. Crawford and that at no time did he mention the issues

he had while employed at his previous employer, namely the allegations of theft of

needles and falsifying a report.

[24] Ms. Peck disputes the account of Ms. Vaughan as to the conversation that took place

between them in the adult day room on March 16, 2021. Ms. Peck asserts that she went

to the meeting as a result of concerns expressed to her about Ms. Vaughan being in the

adult day room instead of on the units. Ms. Peck acknowledged that the conversation

turned to the issue of a union, as a result of Ms. Vaughan indicating she did not wish to

be on the units where union discussion was prevalent.

[25] Ms. Peck testified that she did not know who was for or against a union and just wanted

everyone to vote. She denied stating to Ms. Vaughan that she should pretend the

conversation never took place. Ms. McEwen stated that after Ms. Vaughan met with Ms.

Peck that Ms. Vaughan went to Ms. McEwen’s office and stated that she felt better after

speaking with Ms. Peck. Ms. Vaughan denied doing so.

[26] Ms. Peck also disputes the assertion from Ms. Nielsen that she brought up union issues

during her discussion with Ms. Nielsen on February 25, 2021. Ms. Peck asserts that she

was not even aware of union activity at Wynn Park until March 2, 2021, after the Rank

and File article came out.

[27] Ms. Peck testified that a subsequent conversation with Ms. Nielsen on March 5, 2021,

which is the same day the car rally was taking place, did involve a discussion of union

issues, specifically inaccuracies in the Rank and File article, according to Ms. Peck. Ms.

Peck acknowledged that she told Ms. Nielsen that the article was not true and Mr.

Crawford had not been terminated for union activity. Ms. Peck also stated that she

apologized to Ms. Nielsen for everything she and the other staff were going through.

Union Witnesses

[28] The Union called a total of 14 witnesses.

Testimony of Elaine Nielsen

[29] Ms. Nielsen testified she is a continuing care assistant (“CCA”) employed at Wynn Park

Villa and has been since June 2014, and she worked at all material times on the East Unit

at Wynn Park Villa. She referred to her sworn affidavit referred to in the Union’s Exhibit

Book U-1, tab 2, upon which she was cross-examined by Mr. Proctor.

[30] Ms. Nielsen testified that on February 15, 2021, she took a personal leave of absence of

four weeks to take care of her father who was ill. She stated that on or about February 15

or 16, 2021, she saw a letter on the East Unit meeting room table that described a concern

with resident access to the East Unit nurses’ station, raising health and safety, privacy,

hygiene and work efficiency issues. She understands that Megan Murphy, LPN on the East

Unit, drafted the letter, which described separate incidents between January and

February 2021 of residents reportedly urinating on the vitals cart, taking a binder with

patient contact information, sitting at the computer and flipping through the patients

charts, attempting to take things off the desk, trying to use the phone, and sitting on the

floor in the nurses station. Further, there was reference to a 2020 death certificate

missing from the station.

[31] Ms. Nielsen said the letter was addressed to Ms. Peck, Administrator of Wynn Park Villa,

stating that staff felt they spent so much time keeping residents away from the nurses’

station that it was taking away from their work. The letter addressed to Ms. Peck

requested there be Plexiglas barriers and gates to keep residents out of the nurses’

station. She said she signed the reprinted letter either February 15 or 16, 2021, as it was

reprinted by Denise MacKenzie, LPN, who typed it due to the original copy being smeared

with packets of butter by one of the residents. The letter was signed by several staff in

addition to Ms. Nielsen.

[32] Ms. Nielsen testified she heard from her co-workers that the letter was submitted to Ms.

Peck after February 17, 2021, by Megan Murphy. She also heard from co-workers that

Ms. Peck did not agree with the recommendations as she believed any barriers around

the nurses’ station would cause health and safety issues.

[33] Ms. Nielsen testified that on February 24, 2021, at some point in the morning, Mr.

Crawford, told her and Ms. Beaver and other CCA’s at Wynn Park that he had sent emails

to two unions that day. She testified that around 11:00 a.m. on February 24, 2021, Ms.

Peck and Ms. Blois, Human Resources Manager, went to the East Unit to investigate the

concerns raised in the letter submitted by Megan Murphy concerning resident access to

the nurses’ station. Ms. Nielsen said that she observed Ms. Peck and Mr. Crawford in

conversation, but she was not paying much attention to it as she returned to her duties

on the East Unit. A little later that day, Mr. Crawford informed her that Ms. Peck was not

in agreement with the recommendations in the letter.

[34] Ms. Nielsen testified that around noon that same day, Mr. Crawford told her that he had

heard back from one union, CUPE. He said this while Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Beaver were

having lunch in the meeting room and he indicated, “if we could just find a couple of

people we could trust, we can get started”. She said that later that afternoon, Mr.

Crawford asked both Ms. Beaver and herself if they would be interested in attending a

meeting about joining a union, to which she agreed.

[35] Ms. Nielsen testified that on Thursday, February 25, 2021, around 10:15 a.m., she was in

the process of delivering two newspapers for East Unit residents when she noticed Ms.

Peck standing between the nurses’ station and the dining room. When Ms. Nielsen

reached one of the resident’s room, Ms. Peck approached her and asked her if she was

happy to be back at work. Ms. Waldron, another CCA, was present when Ms. Peck made

the comment. Ms. Nielsen testified that she believed that Ms. Peck’s tone indicated that

Ms. Peck believes that Ms. Nielsen was not happy to be back at work. Ms. Nielsen

indicated to Ms. Peck that she missed her work routine and as she walked down the hall,

Ms. Peck followed her and asked her the names of residents in rooms that they had

passed, with a question, “are they the problem?” Ms. Nielsen testified that she

understood that the questions were in respect to whether these were the residents

referred to that were wandering into the nurses’ station and taking things.

[36] Ms. Nielsen further testified when she got to a resident’s room, referred to at the hearing

as DC, Ms. Peck inquired whose room it was as the resident was not in their room. Ms.

Peck then requested Ms. Nielsen to come into the room and close the door. Ms. Nielsen

testified that Ms. Peck then made the comment “I shouldn’t be asking you this, but you

are a loyal staff member so I will ask you anyways”. Ms. Peck then asked her if she had

heard of any talk going around about getting a union in Wynn Park Villa. Ms. Nielsen

replied to Ms. Peck that she had not heard anything, notwithstanding she had heard some

talk from Mr. Crawford the previous day. She testified Ms. Peck repeated the question

several times and indicated it would take 50 percent of the staff to get a union. Ms. Peck

then wondered aloud if 50 percent of the staff could be unhappy. Ms. Nielsen said Ms.

Peck named Ms. Waldron as perhaps being a complainer. Ms. Nielsen told Ms. Peck she

did not know, but Ms. Peck could ask Ms. Waldron

[37] Ms. Nielsen testified she asked Ms. Peck if anyone had tried to get a union into Wynn Park

previously to which Ms. Peck responded that years ago there was an attempt and she had

told the union organizers at that time that a union was not wanted and if they did not like

that they should go work somewhere else. Ms. Nielsen further testified that Ms. Peck

stated, “…if it is still the same, if people are not happy, they should not work here”. She

said Ms. Peck then indicated Ms. Peck thought it was mostly staff in the East Unit that

were wanting a union. She questioned Ms. Peck whether it was her own rotation, or

another rotation and Ms. Peck said she did not know. Ms. Peck wondered out loud if the

talk of a union had to do with the request for the Plexiglas or nurses’ station barrier.

[38] Ms. Nielsen testified that, when the conversation with Ms. Peck ended and Ms. Peck went

to leave the room, Ms. Peck turned to her and said, “do not tell anyone we had this

conversation, this conversation never happened”. Ms. Nielsen said that she felt the

conversation with Ms. Peck was very intense and she left the room feeling uncomfortable,

interrogated, intimidated and threatened. She said she was shaken and that when she

saw Ms. Beaver, she told Ms. Beaver about the conversation with Ms. Peck and that she

was stressed out having to deal with her father and having to deal with the confrontation

with Ms. Peck. Ms. Nielsen said she became very emotional and cried and she felt abused,

especially where she was told not to tell anyone about the conversation.

[39] Ms. Nielsen testified Ms. Waldron came by and saw her condition and she did not want

to discuss it right there with Ms. Waldron, but a few days later she told Ms. Waldron about

the conversation with Ms. Peck. She testified she also emailed Mr. Crawford the next

morning about her conversation with Ms. Peck and she referred to Exhibit A attached to

her affidavit.

[40] Ms. Nielsen testified that the next day, Friday, February 26, 2021, when she was off work,

she received a text message from Mr. Crawford around 3:00 p.m., stating that he had

been fired over the phone by Ms. McEwen and he was not given a reason, but the letter

was going to come to him on Monday. Ms. Nielsen said she felt terrible because, due to

her conversation with Ms. Peck the day before, she felt that Mr. Crawford might have

been fired for his union involvement. She said Ms. Peck made it clear that management

did not want a union. She said she felt scared about what may happen next.

[41] Attached as Exhibit B to her affidavit was a Facebook friend request from Ms. Peck of

February 27, 2021, but she did not accept that request.

[42] Ms. Nielsen testified that on Monday, March 1, 2021, the Director of Care, Ms. McEwen

came and got her, Ms. Beaver and Ms. Waldron and took them to the East Unit meeting

room and informed them that Mr. Crawford no longer worked at Wynn Park Villa and that

she could not discuss any reasons due to privacy. She testified that Ms. McEwen looked

around the room and said that she, Ms. McEwen, sometimes thinks the room is bugged.

Ms. McEwen then indicated she had no reason to fire Mr. Crawford, and that

management had written a letter and had her sign it. Ms. Nielsen further testified that

Ms. McEwen admitted that Mr. Crawford was fired because Ms. Peck found out that he

wanted a union. Ms. Nielsen testified that she believed, between the firing of Mr.

Crawford and the behaviour of Ms. Peck, people who would otherwise have signed union

cards and voted for the union were scared and afraid of losing their jobs.

[43] Ms. Nielsen testified on March 5, 2021, around 1:30 p.m., as she was coming out of Room

328, she saw Ms. Peck coming down the hall and calling out her name. Ms. Peck said that

she wanted to apologize to Ms. Nielsen because, when she read the Rank and File article

she believed she must have offended Ms. Nielsen. Ms. Nielsen responded to Ms. Peck by

saying, “that’s funny because when I read the article in the paper, I thought she must be

doing that to other people”. Ms. Nielsen testified that Ms. Peck then commented by

saying “I did not do that to anyone else, you were the only one”.

[44] Ms. Nielsen testified that she did not believe Ms. Peck as she had spoken to another staff

member who said that Ms. Peck did the exact same thing to her on the same day that she

did it to Ms. Nielsen. Ms. Nielsen said that she and Ms. Peck sat on the couch outside

Room 328, which was recorded on camera, and had a long conversation. Ms. Nielsen said

that Ms. Peck wanted to apologize to her and she accepted her apology, although she felt

very uncomfortable. Ms. Nielsen testified that Ms. Peck told her that the union rally had

been terrible, and that Mr. Crawford had told someone to “F-off”.

[45] Ms. Nielsen said Ms. Peck continued to discuss Mr. Crawford and said that while Mr.

Crawford had not made reference to ”that word” (referring to the word union) at the

nurses’ station, someone has called Ms. Peck at home and told her that Mr. Crawford was

claiming he had said it. Ms. Nielsen assumed that since Ms. Peck was talking about the

Rank and File article that the word she was referring to was the word ”union”. She said

while Ms. Peck was talking to her, Ms. Peck was not wearing a face mask and Sheila Dale

(“Ms. Dale”), administrative assistant, came down the hallway and gave Ms. Peck one to

put on.

[46] Ms. Nielsen testified that she questioned Ms. Peck why she was so suspicious of her as

she would never bad mouth the place, especially as the residents get good care at Wynn

Park and co-workers treat each other with respect. She said Ms. Peck asked her if she still

feels that way and she replied that she did. Ms. Peck indicated that when staff were

unionized at Townsview Estates they were horrible to each other and it was a terrible

atmosphere. Ms. Nielsen said Ms. Peck said she hoped we had made an informed decision

and did our research because once you get a union you are stuck with it forever and Ms.

Peck said it would be awful. She said Ms. Peck was shaking her head and not finishing her

sentences, but conveyed a very negative view of unionization. She said Ms. Peck was very

emotional about it and indicated that she hoped that staff would make an informed

decision.

[47] Ms. Nielsen said that she went back to work and was visibly affected by the conversation

with Ms. Peck and she asked Denise MacKenzie, LPN, if the staff could have their break

together that day, which they did in the meeting room. She said Sarah Weatherbee (“Ms.

Weatherbee”) and Ms. Waldron sat with her and she told them about the conversation

she had had with Ms. Peck. Ms. Nielsen said that after the break she spoke to Denise

MacKenzie, who advised that Ms. Peck had done the same to her. Ms. Nielsen testified

the atmosphere had been like walking on eggshells since the firing of Mr. Crawford.

[48] Ms. Nielsen said that on Sunday, March 22, 2021, she was working, as was Ms. McEwen,

which was rare for her. When Ms. Nielsen was in a shower room with a resident, Chantel

Hamilton, LPN, opened the door and told her that Ms. McEwen had come and taken Ms.

Beaver off the unit and indicated that she was concerned that perhaps Ms. Beaver was

going to be terminated for union activities. Ms. Nielsen said that later that day she walked

by the meeting room and saw Ms. Beaver crying. Ms. Beaver told her that Ms. McEwen

had taken her into her office and accused her of campaigning for the union on work time,

which Ms. Beaver denied. Ms. Nielsen said she believed Ms. Beaver because CUPE staffer

Mr. Rao told them in previous conversations that they should not be organizing on work

time.

[49] Ms. Nielsen testified that, prior to the vote on March 26, 2021, she was informed that Ms.

Peck had also spoken to Ms. Macumber who felt pressured, and to Ms. MacKenzie by

phone at home.

[50] She further testified that on April 7, 2021, Ms. McEwen and Denise MacKenzie, LPN, came

to the East Unit meeting room when she, Ms. Beaver and Ms. Waldron were having their

break. She said Denise MacKenzie had a list of things that she wanted to speak to Ms.

Nielsen, Ms. Beaver and Ms. Waldron about. In particular Denise MacKenzie stated that

the three employees’ breaks were too long, they were not starting the day early enough

and Ms. McEwen had raised concerns about the atmosphere in the East Unit for the

residents as no one wanted to come and work on that unit. Ms. Nielsen testified that she

asked to know who she may have offended so that she could apologize, and Ms. McEwen

said, “if it was me, I would have to take you in my office and speak to you about it”. Ms.

Nielsen said that Ms. McEwen said that to her while she was looking at Ms. Beaver. Ms.

Nielsen said that Ms. McEwen then turned to Ms. Beaver and pointed her finger right at

her and said she had been the one most passionate about this and that they were very

angry and were not used to Ms. Beaver acting like that. Ms. McEwen said her daughters

Megan Murphy and Madison Murphy had been afraid to come to work. Ms. Nielsen

testified that Ms. McEwen questioned them as to why they felt their jobs were not secure

and Ms. Nielsen, Ms. Beaver and Ms. Waldron said it was because Mr. Crawford was let

go without reasons being given. Ms. Nielsen said they told Ms. McEwen they did not feel

that they were acting rudely to anyone and that they felt they were being watched by

other staff all the time. She testified she felt she was, as well as Ms. Beaver and Ms.

Waldron, being targeted and treated differently and unfairly due to their support of

getting unionized because of the complaints the union had filed.

[51] Ms. Nielsen testified that on April 8, 2021, she ran into Ms. Vaughan at Walmart and Ms.

Vaughan told her how Ms. Peck had spoken to her privately and stated that as an RN Ms.

Vaughan needed to support management. Ms. Nielsen understood that to mean to

support Wynn Park and not support the union. Ms. Vaughan told Ms. Nielsen that Ms.

Peck had told her not to tell anyone about their conversation and further that Ms. Peck

said “this conversation never happened”.

[52] Ms. Nielsen testified that, based upon her conversations with Ms. Vaughan, Denise

MacKenzie, and Mr. Crawford and what others had told her, she suspected that Ms. Peck

also spoke to other staff to pressure them to support management and vote against the

union. She testified that it was her belief that the actions of management probably made

a difference in the outcome of the vote held March 26, 2021, which was counted on April

21, 2021. Ms. Nielsen said she was informed by Mr. Rao of CUPE that the outcome of the

vote was 42 Yes, and 46 No with 2 envelopes not being opened due to a labelling error.

[53] With respect to allegations about Mr. Crawford, Ms. Nielsen testified some residents who

had dementia and cognitive issues often wander into the nurses’ station and some may

give back rubs or back scratches, but she never heard of any of the RNs, LPNs or CCAs

inviting the residents in. She said Mr. Crawford received a back rub from a resident who

had cognitive issues. She conceded on cross examination that she did not mention in

paragraph 6 of her affidavit that some residents were giving back rubs or back scratches

to staff. She testified that Mr. Crawford said in the Rank and File article that he had been

fired for saying the word ‘union’, however she said she did not hear Mr. Crawford say that

at the nurses’ station.

Testimony of Sarah Weatherbee

[54] Ms. Weatherbee testified she has worked at Wynn Park since May 2012 as a CCA, mainly

full time in the North Unit, since February 2020. She previously worked part time in all

three units. She testified she heard from other employees that Mr. Crawford was fired in

February 2021. She also read the article in Rank and File publication which indicated Mr.

Crawford was fired for saying the word ‘union’. She testified that did not surprise her as

Ms. Peck had said a few years prior to not say the word ‘union’ around her. Ms.

Weatherbee testified however, that Ms. Peck did not say that to her, and she does not

remember who told her that. She testified she was not surprised because other

employees had told her that Wynn Park did not want a union. Ms. Weatherbee also

testified that Ms. McKay indicated to her that she was concerned of being let go and

advised Ms. Weatherbee not to use the word ‘union’.

[55] Ms. Weatherbee testified that on Friday, March 5, 2021, she saw Ms. Nielsen after lunch

and Ms. Nielsen had indicated she had been talking with Ms. Peck while both were sitting

on a couch in the hall. Ms. Weatherbee said it was unusual to see Ms. Peck as she very

rarely came to their floor and when she saw Ms. Peck, Ms. Peck was not wearing a mask

and she wondered why she had Ms. Nielsen aside to talk to her. Ms. Weatherbee said

that after Ms. Nielsen spoke to Ms. Peck, Ms. Nielsen appeared to be upset. Ms.

Weatherbee identified, in Exhibit U-1, Tab 14, the East Unit area where Ms. Peck and Ms.

Nielsen were seated while talking outside Room 328 and she identified a video camera

that overlooked that area. Ms. Weatherbee testified that Ms. Nielsen had told her that

Ms. Peck was sorry for the article in the Rank and File publication.

[56] Ms. Weatherbee testified that she was curious of Facebook comments showing screen

shots of the Wynn Park Villa team and she said Julie White (“Ms. White”) created the

Wynn Park Villa Facebook page. Ms. Weatherbee said that there were comments by Ms.

Peck, Ms. McEwen, Ms. Blois, Megan Murphy and others. Ms. Weatherbee testified that

it was her view that Wynn Park was trying to get staff to vote against the Union. Ms.

Weatherbee testified that on the day of the vote, staff of Wynn Park were given pizza

around lunch time. She said this was interesting because it was not very often that they

received free food from Wynn Park, aside from special occasions such as Christmas,

Thanksgiving, Easter, etc. Ms. Weatherbee said that she thought there were pro-union

and non-union camps and Ms. White was in the non-union camp, as well as Ms. McKay.

She thought the Wynn Park Facebook was more of a public Facebook and not a union

Facebook page. She said she did not look at the Wynn Park Villa’s Facebook page very

often.

[57] Ms. Weatherbee was referred to the Respondent’s Exhibit Book, Tab 4, being the notice

to employees of application for certification being posted. She said with respect to the

pizza being given to staff on the day of the vote, to her knowledge it was not pre-planned

and she thought about three to four years ago they were given free pizza during a snow

storm. She said she was not there at the time, but she had heard about it. She said a few

years’ earlier coffee and muffins were brought in and sometimes there was a BBQ.

[58] Ms. Weatherbee testified Ms. Beaver’s daughter brought in some cupcakes the day of the

vote which were available to everyone in the unit as well as the pizza that was supplied

by Wynn Park. She said she was not surprised when she saw the article in the Rank and

File publication that Mr. Crawford said he was fired for using the word ‘union’. She

accepted the article at face value.

Testimony of Leslie “Joy” MacKenzie

[59] Ms. MacKenzie testified she is a CCA and has worked at Wynn Park since June 2012. She

filed an affidavit referred to in the Union’s Exhibit Book 1, Tab 3. She testified that she

heard around March 2, 2021, from her co-workers that Mr. Crawford had been fired. She

said she was shocked that he had been fired for saying the word ‘union’. She said she has

been working at Wynn Park for over 9 years and it was common knowledge among staff

that if you say the word ‘union’, you will be fired.

[60] Ms. MacKenzie testified she never saw the article in Rank and File and she does not use

technology. She testified that on Thursday, March 4, 2021, she was having lunch in the

North Unit lunchroom with Kathy Blaikie, another CCA, when Ms. McEwen, Director of

Care, came into the lunchroom and shut the door. Ms. McEwen indicated there was a lot

of talk going on about a unionization drive and indicated to them that if they had any

questions to come and ask her, but she was not allowed to talk. She testified that Ms.

McEwen told her and Ms. Blaikie that they would not be allowed to be part of the union

because they were supervisors. Ms. MacKenzie said she was left with the impression that

management was concerned that employees would join the union and management was

discouraging it. Ms. MacKenzie further testified that she was left confused as to whether

RNs or LPNs could be part of the union and she had heard from some employees who

were supporting the union that LPNs and RNs could be in the union. She said she was

informed by Ms. Rafuse on March 21, 2021, that there would be a union meeting at the

Best Western, but she could not attend.

[61] Ms. MacKenzie testified she did not know about any union organization on or about

March 4, 2021, or whether a union campaign drive was ongoing. She testified that around

March 4, 2021, when Ms. McEwen met with them, that she, Ms. MacKenzie, did not know

of the union drive. With respect to her affidavit, paragraph 6, Ms. MacKenzie testified

that while there was a lot of talk going on, she did not use those words, and someone

prepared the affidavit on her behalf. She believed it might have been Mr. Rao. Ms.

MacKenzie testified that she did not recall seeing her affidavit before the hearing and she

acknowledged there may be some inaccuracies in it, although she did acknowledge

signing it. She confirmed that she did not read over her affidavit before she signed it and

only started to read it when she began testifying at the hearing.

[62] Ms. MacKenzie testified that, with respect to the union meeting on March 21, 2021, she

did not participate as she was off work that day. She said she received a phone call on

Monday March 22, 2021, from Ms. Peck who wanted to know if she was at the meeting

at the Best Western on Sunday night, March 21, and she indicated she was not as she was

home with her elderly mother. She testified Ms. Peck told her there was a lot of stuff

going on and if she had any questions, she could call her at any time. Ms. MacKenzie said

Ms. Peck expressed concern that Ms. MacKenzie may have attended a union meeting.

She said she felt upset after Ms. Peck called her at home and she felt intimidated. Ms.

MacKenzie testified that Ms. Peck only talked to her a few times over the 9 years that she

worked at Wynn Park and she never called her at home. Ms. MacKenzie testified she did

not think it was any of Ms. Peck’s business if she did attend a union meeting. She felt Ms.

Peck did not want her to get involved with the Union. Ms. MacKenzie said following the

call with Ms. Peck, she texted Ms. Rafuse to tell her about the phone call.

[63] Ms. MacKenzie testified that she was aware that in reply to the union complaints that

Wynn Park has claimed that Ms. Peck only called to inform her where and when to vote.

However, Ms. MacKenzie testified that Ms. Peck never mentioned anything on the phone

about where the union vote would happen, and she only found out of the location of the

vote a day or two later when she texted again with Ms. Rafuse.

[64] On cross examination, Ms. MacKenzie indicated that paragraph 15 of her affidavit did not

reflect her language. Specifically, she said that she would not use the words “third day of

vacation”. Ms. MacKenzie acknowledged that she could have proofread her affidavit and

that she did not read it carefully before she signed it. She thought Mr. Rao had given it to

her to read over and sign. She also acknowledged, on cross examination, that she does

not use email and it would not be unusual for someone to call her, such as Ms. Peck, to

inform her of the union vote; however, she said Ms. Peck did not tell her of the date and

place for the union vote during that call.

Testimony of James Moore

[65] Mr. Moore testified that he has worked at Wynn Park since March 2009 and in the year

2013, he became a CCA and he is now working in the West Unit of Wynn Park.

[66] Mr. Moore testified that he saw the Rank and File photo of Mr. Crawford with his dog,

but he did not read the article and he thought that was around March 2, 2021. He testified

that Denise MacKenzie, a co-worker, told him that Mr. Crawford was terminated and that

he had used the word ‘union’ at a meeting with management. Mr. Moore testified that

he was at a meeting on March 14, 2021, attended by approximately 15 to 20 people, and

there was information on unionization. He also attended a meeting on March 22, 2021,

with approximately 20 to 30 people there. At the meeting of March 14, he indicated that

Mr. Rao of CUPE was in attendance and Mr. Rao was providing information on behalf of

the Union and Mr. Crawford was also there and at that time he had been terminated.

[67] Mr. Moore testified that at the meeting of March 22, 2021, which he understood to be a

sharing of information meeting, he asked questions of Mr. Rao. Also, he saw Ms. McKay

and Madison Murphy speaking to Mr. Rao outside in the hall. He testified there was a lot

of support for the union at that meeting.

[68] Mr. Moore testified that he was aware of a lock being broken on March 22, 2021, on a

filing cabinet which was used by Ms. Rafuse; however, he did not see who took off the

lock and someone just told him about it. He said employees have access to filing cabinets

and he did not speak to Ms. McEwen about the lock being broken nor did he ask Ms.

Rafuse about it.

[69] He testified he had been dissatisfied with working at Wynn Park over the last two years

as he had friction with a co-worker, which he spoke to Ms. McEwen about. He also applied

for a recreation coordinator position but was unsuccessful, although he never expressed

any upset with the person who received the job.

[70] Mr. Moore testified on April 1, 2021, April Fool’s Day, he had set off an alarm bell and was

disciplined by Ms. McEwen.

Testimony of Shalene Rafuse

[71] Ms. Rafuse testified that she is an LPN at Wynn Park and has worked there since

November 2011. She was cross examined on her affidavit referred to in Exhibit U-1, Tab

4. She testified she works on the North Unit of Wynn Park and when she started working

in November 2011, she recalled seeing a posted sign on the double doors leading to the

back maintenance hallway saying words to the effect, “if approached by a union

representative, do not talk to them”. She stated these doors led to the housekeeping

rooms, staff break room, laundry room, EMO room, maintenance room, etc. She testified

she concluded that management opposed unions.

[72] Ms. Rafuse further testified this belief was supported by a former employee, Jacqueline

Dale, who also saw signs in 2011 to 2012 that talk of a union would not be tolerated. Ms.

Rafuse testified that on March 2, 2021, she was made aware that a co-worker, Mr.

Crawford, had been fired. She found this out from a Rank and File article, which was a

CUPE union publication. She also testified that on March 2, 2021, she had a conversation

with Ms. Vaughan, RN, who told her that Ms. McEwen, Director of Care, had told her that

there were no grounds to fire Mr. Crawford and that Ms. McEwen did not agree with his

firing, but Ms. Peck wanted him terminated.

[73] Ms. Rafuse testified that on the morning of March 5, 2021, Ms. McEwen came onto her

unit and said that day was going to be disruptive because of a rally going on and the fact

that Mr. Crawford was terminated. She said Ms. McEwen also said to her words to the

effect that, “you know as a supervisor, you would not be able to be involved with the

union”. She said Ms. McEwen wanted to know where her head was with all of this and

she was referring to the union drive and rally. Ms. Rafuse said she told Ms. McEwen that

she was just taking it all in.

[74] Ms. Rafuse further said Ms. McEwen told her they expect support of the supervisors to

be on board with management, and thus she believed they expected her to be against

the union drive. Ms. Rafuse said she felt upset, scared and confused as to whether she

should sign a union card. She testified on that same day, March 5, 2021, Ms. Vaughan,

RN, had told her of a similar conversation she had with Ms. McEwen whereby Ms.

McEwen informed Ms. Vaughan that RNs would not be able to join CUPE and that senior

staff were expected to be on board with management. She said she subsequently found

out in days to follow that Ms. Cameron, LPN; and Bonnie Ross, RN had similar

conversations with Ms. McEwen as well as Ms. MacKenzie and Cathy Blaikie. Ms. Rafuse

testified that on March 5, 2021, at 2:00 p.m., she was at the desk in the nurses’ station

doing paperwork and she saw on the monitor that Ms. Peck was talking to Ms. Nielsen for

more than 30 minutes in the East unit. She said there are three units, East, West and

North Unit and she mainly works in the North unit.

[75] Ms. Rafuse testified that on March 16, 2021, at approximately 10 a.m., Ms. McEwen held

a meeting in the board room on the first floor and Ms. Rafuse was present as well as Ms.

Vaughan, Denise MacKenzie, and Janet Stone. Ms. Rafuse said Ms. McEwen told them

they were expected to be supportive of Wynn Park as supervisors and they were not to

be whispering in the hallways to each other. Ms. Rafuse testified that she took that to

mean they had to be supportive of senior management’s position of being anti-union.

[76] Ms. Rafuse testified that Denise MacKenzie and Ms. Vaughan raised concerns that some

staff were being intimidated and upset by Ms. Peck talking to staff members in private

and Ms. McEwen indicated that Wynn Park was Ms. Peck’s building and she had every

right to come up to the units. Ms. Rafuse said Ms. McEwen said staff get upset when she

does not go to the units and now they are upset that she is coming up. She said Ms.

McEwen did not answer the questions about staff members being taken aside and talked

to privately with Ms. Peck.

[77] Ms. Rafuse testified she felt intimidated and upset that Ms. McEwen, who was the

Director of Care, was directing comments at her and Ms. Vaughan. She said Ms. Vaughan

called her in the evening of March 16, 2021, to say she also felt Ms. McEwen was speaking

to them directly.

[78] Ms. Rafuse testified that on Sunday, March 21, 2021, Ms. McEwen asked to speak with

her in her office. Ms. Rafuse said she found it strange that Ms. McEwen came to work on

a Sunday as she rarely comes in on the weekend. She testified she had seen her on a

monitor entering the East Unit with Ms. Beaver going into her office and then leaving her

office and walking toward the North Unit. Ms. Rafuse testified that she asked Ms. McEwen

if Ms. Burns could accompany her to Ms. McEwen’s office and was told by Ms. McEwen,

“there is no union here, you do not need someone with you”.

[79] Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. McEwen requested her to stop harassing co-workers about

the union and also questioned her about who had told Ms. Rafuse that she could

campaign for the union on her breaks. Ms. Rafuse said that she told Ms. McEwen that it

was CUPE, but Ms. McEwen stated that it was not allowed as they were paid breaks. Ms.

Rafuse said Ms. McEwen indicated that staff were feeling harassed and felt as if they could

not come to work or visit on the unit. Ms. Rafuse further said she told Ms. McEwen that

the claim of harassment was not true and she had been careful not to set up any follow-

up messages to people who were not interested and she was not aware of anyone being

uncomfortable. Ms. Rafuse testified that, even though they had paid breaks, they had to

stay on the premises.

[80] Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. McEwen said to her that she did not know why Ms. Rafuse

was so passionate about the union and that she needed to continue to be a supervisor.

Ms. Rafuse testified that, since she knew Mr. Crawford was a supervisor who had been

fired, she was fearful for her job if she did not stop participating in the union.

[81] Ms. Rafuse testified that following the meeting with Ms. McEwen she returned to the

North Unit shaken up, crying, and feeling intimidated. She said she told her co-workers,

Ms. Burns, Kelly LeBlanc and Bonnie Ross, that she was scared that she was going to be

fired for supporting the union. She said that on March 22, 2021, she was informed by Mr.

Moore, CCA that he knew management went into her filing cabinet on her day off. Ms.

Rafuse said she received a text message on her day off, March 22, 2021, from Ms.

MacKenzie in which Ms. MacKenzie explained that she had received a call from Ms. Peck

who asked if she was at a union meeting on Sunday, March 2, 2021. Ms. Rafuse testified

that a complaint was filed on Ms. MacKenzie’s behalf and Ms. Peck said she was calling

to convey information about the day, time and place of the union vote. Ms. Rafuse

testified that she found that strange as she only found out from the CUPE staffer, Mr. Rao

on the evening of March 23, 2021, when the vote would take place. She testified she was

informed by Ms. MacKenzie that Ms. MacKenzie was only informed of the time of the

vote on March 24, 2021.

[82] Ms. Rafuse testified that she told her coworkers and they were all upset that management

would go into her filing cabinet. She said management’s reason was that if there was a

licensing inspection or audit it would have to be opened. Ms. Rafuse said that since she

had been working there since 2011, she finds this to be too much of a coincidence. She

testified since 2011, whenever there would be a licensing inspection or audit, there was

preparation to ensure everything was in order. She said they never had charts or drawers

cleaned or reorganized in her unit or any other unit.

[83] Ms. Rafuse testified she was made aware by a co-worker, Danielle McCallum, that Ms.

Peck had made statements to kitchen staff that their pensions would be affected if the

union came in. Ms. Rafuse said she was concerned that management was spreading

untruths to convince employees to oppose the union. She said Ms. McCallum indicated

an employee who was near retirement would most likely decide to oppose the union if

that was the case.

[84] Ms. Rafuse testified that on Thursday, March 25, 2021, that she had a conversation with

Ms. Vaughan who told her that Ms. Peck expected her to remain loyal to the company

and said words to the effect, “do I have your loyalty?” and she was pressuring Ms.

Vaughan to support the management. Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. Vaughan told her that

she told Ms. Peck that she was just staying neutral, which was consistent with what Ms.

Vaughan had told Ms. Rafuse before. Ms. Rafuse said Ms. Vaughan was very upset and

emotional and was nervous about her continued employment.

[85] Ms. Rafuse testified that, in a subsequent conversation with Ms. Vaughan, after March

25, 2021, Ms. Vaughan provided additional information about her discussions with Ms.

Peck. One conversation took place in Ms. Vaughan’s office in the adult day room, where

Ms. Peck closed the door and told Ms. Vaughan that someone had said she had been

whispering with Ms. Rafuse which raised the suspicion that Ms. Vaughan was pro-union.

Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. Vaughan said that Ms. Peck had made numerous comments

about the union and said “if people talk union, you need to ask people - why do you need

a union?”

[86] Ms. Rafuse further testified that on March 26, 2021, which was the voting day, she read

a Facebook post by Ms. Peck on the Wynn Park Villa Facebook page, which is attached as

Exhibit C to her affidavit, thanking staff for their support. Ms. Rafuse said that it was her

belief that Ms. Peck would reward those that supported management and target those

who did not. Further, she testified Ms. Beaver shared a screen shot where Ms. Peck had

posted to her Facebook page the words “unfortunately, Karma is going to hit some of you

all for ya’ll people who had nothing but good intentions for you”. Ms. Rafuse said she

found that very alarming and she felt it was directed at pro-union staff such as herself.

[87] Further, Ms. Rafuse testified that on April 24, 2021, Ms. Burris texted her regarding Ms.

Thody. Apparently, Ms. Thody had said she was devastated because she thought

everyone liked working at Wynn Park and it was a tragedy certain people were forcing a

corrupt union on everyone and victimizing her family. Ms. Rafuse testified that on that

same day, Ms. Burris texted her regarding Mr. Thody, who had threatened to keep Ms.

Burris’ benefits from her for another three months because she had 2 sick days. Ms.

Burris’s text said of Brittany and Mark Thody, “they have to be accountable”. Ms. Rafuse

testified she was informed by Mr. Rao that Ms. Burris’ texted him on April 23, 2021, saying

Brittany and Mark Thody portrayed the union as an evil entity that was out to ruin her life

and Mr. Thody was no better than Ms. Thody by threatening Ms. Burris’ for missing a few

days.

[88] Ms. Rafuse further testified she saw the union rally from the balcony and it was peaceful

and there was no honking of horns, contrary to Ms. McEwen saying the day was going to

be a disruption due to the rally.

Testimony of Jenna Cameron

[89] Ms. Cameron filed an affidavit referred to in Exhibit Book U-1, Tab 5. She testified that

she is an LPN at Wynn Park and works on the East Unit. She has worked at Wynn Park for

five years. She testified that on March 23, 2021, the CA Ms. Macumber, who is now an

RN, told her that the administrator Ms. Peck questioned her about how she was going to

vote and pushed her to vote for the employer against the union. At 3:00 p.m. on that

same day Ms. McEwen came into the nurses’ station on the East Unit and started a

conversation with Ms. Cameron, Ms. Macumber, Sharon Fiddes and Santana Higgins.

[90] Ms. Cameron testified that, during her conversation with Ms. McEwen, Ms. Peck came by

and Ms. Macumber left the area. After Ms. McEwen left, Ms. Macumber reappeared and

said that Ms. Peck had pulled her aside and asked her to be there for the vote because

she knew where Ms. Macumber’s vote was. Ms. Cameron testified that Ms. Macumber

further said that Ms. Peck had repeated words to the effect of, “well, I do don’t I?” Ms.

Macumber appeared visibly upset and said she was shocked, upset and concerned that

Ms. Peck was pressuring employees to vote against the union.

[91] Ms. Cameron testified on cross examination that her affidavit was prepared for her to

sign by Mr. Rao and she went through it many times before she signed it.

Testimony of Tessa Burns

[92] Tessa Burns (“Ms. Burns”) testified on her affidavit referred to in Exhibit U-1, Tab 6 that

she has worked as a CCA at Wynn Park since the summer of 2018. In September 2019,

she went back to school but remained an employee at Wynn Park as a casual employee.

Due to Covid-19, she left school early and came back to work at Wynn Park, working on a

casual basis from March until August 2020, and then going into a permanent position on

March 1, 2021.

[93] Ms. Burns testified she was personally present and saw Ms. Peck in the North Unit not

wearing her mask while talking to David McNutt on March 5, 2021. Ms. Peck interrupted

her break to tell her that management would put a box downstairs and Ms. Peck would

like them to vote yes or no to a union using the employer’s box so she could see where

the employees stood regarding wanting a union or not. Ms. Burns said Ms. Peck inquired

where Ms. Rafuse was as she wanted to speak to her.

[94] On cross examination Ms. Burns testified that, according to Ms. Peck, the box was a

suggestion box and not a voting box, and confirmed that it is still there today. She

conceded suggestions can be put in the box and conceded there was no discussion

generally about union or voting. She said the box was actually placed there by Ms.

Waldron.

Testimony of Beverley Waldron

[95] Ms. Waldron testified on her affidavit referred to in Exhibit Book U-1, Tab 7, and

confirmed that she has worked as a CCA at Wynn Park since May 2012 on the East Unit.

She testified she is one of those who signed a letter of February 16, 2021, outlining the

East Unit staff’s concerns about residents getting into the nurses’ station and she stated

that letter was drafted by LPN Megan Murphy and was passed on the administrator, Ms.

Peck, around February 17, 2021.

[96] Ms. Waldron testified that on or about February 24, 2021, Ms. Peck and Ms. Blois, Human

Resources Director, were along the hallway and were discussing with Mr. Crawford issues

that were raised in the letter that Megan Murphy had sent to Ms. Peck. She testified she

joined the conversation for a few minutes and then returned to her duties. Ms. Waldron

said subsequently when she saw Mr. Crawford at a union meeting at the Glengarry Best

Western, he told her that Ms. McEwen had said to him, “way to go” on February 24, 2021,

when he told her of his suggested changes to the nurses’ station with Ms. Peck. Ms.

Waldron indicated on cross examination, however, that with respect to paragraph 8 of

her affidavit, she was not present when Ms. McEwen made the statement, “way to go”

to Mr. Crawford.

[97] Ms. Waldron testified that on Thursday, February 25, 2021, she was entering a resident’s

room to deliver towels and she found Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Peck already in the room

having a conversation. Ms. Waldron heard Ms. Peck ask Ms. Nielsen if she was happy to

be back at work. She said Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Peck then started to walk down the hallway

and she was following behind when she realized she was not part of the conversation and

she returned to her duties. Ms. Waldron said later on she found Ms. Nielsen in Room 337

with Ms. Beaver. Ms. Nielsen was crying and upset and did not want to talk about it. Ms.

Waldron testified that a few days later Ms. Nielsen told her what happened, which was

Ms. Peck had pulled Ms. Nielsen aside to ask her whether people were organizing a union.

Ms. Nielsen said that Ms. Peck said “was it Beverley Waldron who was talking about a

union” and Ms. Nielsen replied “why don’t you ask her?” On cross examination with

respect to paragraph 9 of her affidavit, Ms. Waldron stated she was not present for the

conversation between Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Peck.

[98] Ms. Waldron testified that on March 1, 2021, Ms. McEwen came to the East Unit and

wanted to talk to her, Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Beaver. Ms. McEwen took them into the

meeting room and closed the door and said she wanted to let everyone know what had

happened to Mr. Crawford, and she said it was not her idea to fire him. Ms. Waldron said

that Ms. McEwen looked around the room and said the room might be bugged,

commenting, “I have nothing against him”, “I would not have fired him, I was forced to

sign the paper”, and then the meeting ended.

[99] Ms. Waldron testified that on Friday, March 5, 2021, she was going to a resident’s room

and she saw Ms. Peck walking down the hallway without a mask looking for Ms. Nielsen

and calling out her name. She said Ms. Peck asked her where Ms. Nielsen was and Ms.

Waldron indicated that she would go get her. Ms. Waldron located Ms. Nielsen and told

her that Ms. Peck was looking for her, to which Ms. Nielsen replied, “oh no, not again”.

[100] Ms. Waldron testified that in the afternoon of March 5, 2021, on her break, she and Ms.

Weatherbee were told by Ms. Nielsen that Ms. Peck had apologized to her and told Ms.

Nielsen that she, Ms. Peck, should not have been on the unit talking to her. Ms. Nielsen

seemed to be very emotional and upset about that conversation with Ms. Peck.

[101] She also testified Mr. Crawford did help others with residents on the unit.

[102] Ms. Waldron further testified expandable barriers were not always up in the nurses’

station, and nurses and CCAs were constantly coming in and out. However, she said the

concerns raised by Mr. Crawford about having Plexiglas were raised, she believed,

sometime around the end of February 2021.

Testimony of Kristen Crawford

[103] Kristen Crawford (“Ms. Crawford”) testified she is a second cousin of Mr. Crawford and is

in the licensing practical nursing program. She said she started working at Wynn Park in

April 2018, and Ms. Blois, HR Manager, had hired her as a casual in housekeeping. She

said she worked approximately 30 to 40 hours a week and she worked in all the units,

North, East and West. She testified she became full time around October 2019 and she is

a residential care assistant and eventually went into CCA work.

[104] Ms. Crawford testified that after being hired she was warned by others to not say the

word ‘union’ and she was aware a housekeeper was spoken to by Ms. McEwen for talking

about attending a meeting at a union. Ms. Crawford testified that she saw Ms. Peck’s

screen shot of Wynn Park team Facebook page, referred to in Exhibit Book U-1, Tab 14,

and she believed the site was created by Ms. White who works in housekeeping. Ms.

Crawford said she saw the Facebook page the day it was created and Ms. White had sent

a Facebook invitation to her, which she declined. Ms. Crawford believes the site was open

to the public; however, she was told by Ms. Waldron that Ms. McEwen blocked Ms.

Waldron from the Facebook page.

[105] Ms. Crawford testified she thought Ms. White was friends with management. She said

Ms. Burris thought the union would be helpful and was trying to get cards signed by staff

members, however, Ms. Burris did not get along with some of the housekeeping staff.

Ms. Crawford said she talked to Mr. Crawford after she saw the article in the Rank and

File publication stating he was terminated for using the word ‘union’.

[106] Ms. Crawford testified she was worried for her job and she thought the vote was a

confidential vote and you should not feel intimidated. She said that, as of the day of her

testimony, she was no longer employed by Wynn Park as she gave her two weeks’ notice

effective May 14, 2021. Ms. Crawford said she had been nervous about her job security

and felt the work environment was different after the vote and Ms. McEwen had blocked

her off her Facebook page and she did not feel wanted at work.

[107] Ms. Crawford testified on cross examination that there was a family connection to get

into Wynn Park as her grandmother had been the Director of Care at Wynn Park, but the

position is now filled by Ms. McEwen. Ms. Crawford said she received a reference from

Mr. Thody for a VON position. She testified Ms. Beaver had told her not to say the word

‘union’, due to issues from before Ms. Crawford started at Wynn Park.

[108] Ms. Crawford said the pressure was on from both sides during the union campaign. She

said when she received a text from Angela Meisner that Mr. Crawford was fired for using

the word ‘union’, and management would not give a reason, she believed Mr. Crawford

and the comments in the Rank and File article.

Testimony of Tevin Crawford

[109] Mr. Crawford was examined on his affidavit referred to Exhibit Book U-1, Tab 8. He

testified he is a licensed practical nurse and worked at Wynn Park from June 2019 to

February 26, 2021, when he was terminated by Ms. McEwen, Director of Care. He testified

he was previously employed as an LPN at Glen Haven Manor, New Glasgow from July 20,

2018, to May 16, 2019. He referred to his affidavit, paragraph 3, that he voluntarily

resigned from Glen Haven Manor (after he misappropriated needles and gave untrue

information on an incident report). He admitted his mistakes and was remorseful and

admitted he learned from his experience.

[110] Mr. Crawford testified that he applied in June 2019 (although on cross-examination he

confirmed the application was earlier, with his interview in May 2019) to be an LPN at

Wynn Park. Mr. Crawford said, when questioned as to what he told Ms. McEwen his

reasons for applying to Wynn Park were, he did not say his girlfriend would be moving to

Truro to attend NSCC, but rather that she had hoped to pursue a career in correction

services.

[111] Mr. Crawford testified that he disclosed to Ms. McEwen, at the job interview, the reasons

for leaving his employment at Glen Haven Manor. Specifically, he told her that he was

suspended without pay and did not have a management reference. He referred to

paragraph 5 of his affidavit where he explained to Ms. McEwen, he could not get a full

reference from his past manager, Janice Gordon. Mr. Crawford testified that Ms. McEwen

told him that she did not require a management reference and agreed to two non-

management references from Aran Gallur and Kim Rafuse, who had been supervisors at

Glen Haven Manor. He acknowledged on cross-examination that neither one may have

been aware of his suspension. He testified he did not use unauthorized references when

he applied for his job at Wynn Park.

[112] Mr. Crawford testified that he had told Ms. McEwen at the interview of the 2 incidences

that led to his suspension with pay. He noted that Ms. Blois, HR Manager, only attended

the meeting for half the interview. Mr. Crawford said that Ms. Blois might not have been

present when he indicated to Ms. McEwen he was under suspension and the reasons for

the suspension at Glen Haven Manor.

[113] Mr. Crawford testified on cross examination that after Glen Haven Manor discovered he

had misappropriated five needles and five syringes in addition to falsifying an incident

report involving a vial of hydromorphone that he broke, he was sent home in March on

paid leave from the workplace, pending an investigation which took place through April

and May of 2019. He conceded that when he applied to Wynn Park he knew he was under

suspension with pay for almost one month prior to applying.

[114] In paragraph 3 of his affidavit Mr. Crawford states that he voluntarily resigned from Glen

Haven Manor but acknowledged in cross examination that he was terminated and later

signed a settlement agreement. He referred to a series of emails in Exhibit 1, Tab 9, and

the Settlement Agreement, Exhibit R-3. He did acknowledge that the Settlement

Agreement that he signed included a clause that required him to get management

approval for his references.

[115] Mr. Crawford said he received positive performance appraisals while working at Wynn

Park. Mr. Crawford testified that at Wynn Park he received one disciplinary record,

received from Ms. McEwen. It was in regards to a co-worker, a female LPN, who was

having personal issues at home. The co-worker showed up on his night shift and they

went into a room, with a closed door, for approximately 10 minutes, although he

acknowledged on cross-examination it was closer to 20 minutes. Mr. Crawford admitted

that the optics were not good that he saw her in behind closed doors and he

acknowledged that he should not have left the nurses’ station especially without anybody

covering it and leaving other nurses to handle some of the workload. In his affidavit there

is a copy of a letter of a verbal warning at Exhibit A.

[116] Mr. Crawford testified that it was possible that, at times, he might have left the nurses’

station unattended and the Med Room open. He testified that at the nurses’ stations

some patients with dementia and memory problems come in to give back rubs and he

received some back rubs from some of these residents as did others on the nursing staff.

[117] Mr. Crawford testified, through his affidavit, that on February 24, 2021, he had a meeting

with Ms. Peck to discuss the safety concerns raised in the letter that had been signed by

the staff about the East Unit nurses’ station. Mr. Crawford testified that he told Ms. Peck

that staff felt that their voices were going unheard and that their opinion did not matter.

He advised her that if there was a union that they would not be dealing with the safety

issues contained in the letter. Mr. Crawford said that Ms. Peck responded that ‘whether

we are unionized or not would not affect the fire marshal’s decision’, referring to the

proposed installation of the Plexiglas. Ms. Peck also reminded him that Wynn Park ‘was

non-unionized and would be staying that way.’ Mr. Crawford testified that Ms. Blois and

other staff participated in the conversation between himself and Ms. Peck from time to

time.

[118] Mr. Crawford acknowledged that the Med Room should never be left alone as it contains

patient’s medicines and residents often walk in the nurses’ station. He testified that there

should always be somebody present for security. He felt that they should have either

Plexiglas or a secured door to prevent residents from wandering in. Mr. Crawford testified

that Ms. Peck disagreed. Mr. Crawford testified that at the meeting with Ms. Peck over

his concerns about the nurses’ station he indicated to Ms. Peck if there was a union

present his concerns would be addressed. He testified that the next day he was

terminated for, in his opinion, using the word ‘union’ at the meeting with Ms. Peck. He

referred to R-1, Tab 14 a Rank and File article where he was quoted as saying the reason

he was terminated was because he used the word ‘union’ in front of Ms. Peck at a

meeting.

[119] Mr. Crawford testified that he spoke to some staff about the need for a union the same

day that he spoke to Ms. Peck, including Meagan Murphy.

[120] He said that up to his termination he believed that he had a good relationship with Ms.

Peck and Ms. McEwen. He and the other nursing staff were concerned with the safety

issues at the nurses’ station and thought that it could be resolved, however there was

resistance from Ms. Peck.

[121] Mr. Crawford said that he spoke to a couple of unions as he was concerned about security

issues at the nurses’ station. Mr. Crawford said that the only union that got back to him

was CUPE. Mr. Rao, the union representative, referred him to a reporter.

[122] Mr. Crawford testified that subsequent to his termination he became aware of a

complaint filed by Carrie Best, who was a casual part time worker. The complaint

stemmed from a text he sent to her and included a claim that he hit on her. Mr. Crawford

denied it and said that after she told him to stop texting her he did. Mr. Crawford said he

respects women in the workplace and takes extra care in dealing with them.

[123] Mr. Crawford confirmed that his affidavit was prepared by Mr. Rao.

Testimony of Govind Rao

[124] Mr. Rao testified that he is the National Service Representative for CUPE as well as a

researcher and had previously lectured at McMaster University in Labour and Political

Studies. He says that with respect to this hearing he was in email correspondence with

Mr. Crawford in February 2021. Mr. Crawford advised that he had been terminated from

Wynn Park and told Mr. Crawford that he believed the termination was as a result of his

saying the word ‘union’ during a meeting with Ms. Peck. Mr. Rao also referred to Mr.

Crawford stating that other workers had felt threatened and intimidated about joining a

union.

[125] Mr. Rao referred to Exhibit U-1, Tab 28, which is a notification of a CUPE car rally and said

that at that time he was preparing for a March 5, 2021, car rally at Wynn Park. He

indicated his intention was to be respectful of the neighborhood and of Covid-19. He

stated that the purpose of the car rally was to support the worker who was terminated

and exercising his rights to organize.

[126] Mr. Rao also referred to a photograph of March 5, 2021, Exhibit U-1, Tab 15, which is a

copy of a photograph of the car rally which was posted in the Truro News. Mr. Rao

testified that he instructed the people attending the car rally not to honk horns or disrupt

the neighbourhood and intended for it to be a peaceful rally. Following the car rally Mr.

Rao said he organized a meeting for March 14, 2021, at the Best Western Hotel in Truro,

Nova Scotia. He believed that approximately 17 people attended. Mr. Rao testified that it

was just a meeting to inform employees of Wynn Park about the benefits of a union. He

testified that this was followed by another meeting on March 21, 2021, also at the Best

Western.

[127] Mr. Rao testified that at the March 21, 2021, meeting approximately 26 people attended.

He noted that Madison Murphy, Ms. McKay and Jennifer MacEachern were in attendance.

Mr. Rao testified that some people appeared to be on edge as they felt that those

individuals were attending as Wynn Park’s representatives. Madison Murphy indicated

that she wished to ask some questions and Mr. Rao said he told her respectfully that he

would answer questions at the conclusion of the meeting. After the meeting, he was

questioned in the hall by Madison Murphy and Ms. McKay regarding losing pension

benefits in the event of unionization. Mr. Rao testified that he told them that CUPE does

not go backwards and would fight to keep their benefits. On March 22, 2021, he had an

hour long question and answer session on Facebook and responded to similar questions

to the ones posed by Madison Murphy the night before.

[128] Mr. Rao testified that he was approached by Ms. Burris and she indicated that she wanted

to become involved with the CUPE campaign. He got in touch with her to see if she wanted

to help out and distribute information. Mr. Rao testified that Ms. Burris told him that Mr.

Thody was going to have her probation extended for several months and she was

concerned about filing a complaint.

[129] Mr. Rao referred to Exhibit R-1, Tab 2, which is a transcript of a conversation between Ms.

Burris and Ms. Blois, which took place on April 28, 2021. Mr. Rao referred to the first page

of the transcript and said that he did not file the affidavit on Ms. Burris’ behalf but on

behalf of the union. Mr. Rao also said that he did not use nasty words about Ms. Thody.

Mr. Rao testified that he believed that, due to Ms. Burris requiring a good reference for a

position she was applying for at the time, she changed her position with respect to

supporting the union.

[130] Mr. Rao testified that the Wynn Park campaign had only been his second union campaign

in Nova Scotia. He did acknowledge that employees are not able to organize during

working hours and he acknowledged that he never visited at Wynn Park. On March 5,

2021, Mr. Rao organized a car rally beside Wynn Park. He acknowledged there were CUPE

vans present and there were cars and union signs and other unions were represented.

[131] Mr. Rao then testified about the Rank and File article, dated March 2, 2021. Mr. Rao said

that he referred Mr. Crawford to journalist, Lisa Cameron, who wrote the article on Mr.

Crawford’s dismissal from Wynn Park. Mr. Rao testified that he made no inquiries of

Wynn Park about the background or the reason for the termination of Mr. Crawford. Mr.

Rao said that he accepted Mr. Crawford’s explanation, including Mr. Crawford’s

information about workers who had indicated that there had been previous attempts to

unionize and there was anti-union sentiment expressed by Wynn Park. Mr. Rao testified

that he filed five unfair labour practices with the Labour Board and was the union

organizer at Wynn Park.

[132] Mr. Rao testified about Ms. Burris and confirmed that he was aware that she did not want

him to file an affidavit on her behalf. He referred to the transcript of her call with Ms.

Blois and acknowledged that he was aware that she told him that information about her

in the affidavit was not correct or true. Mr. Rao testified that he decided to file the

affidavit anyway, knowing Ms. Burris’ position and the issue of the accuracy of the

statements, and did not advise the Labour Board about the accuracy of the statements.

He testified that he was filing the declaration on behalf of the Union and not Ms. Burris.

Mr. Rao noted that he did not say the declaration was based on information and belief

from certain people. He further testified that his declaration dealing with the unfair

labour practices was based on information he collected and he swore the statutory

declaration as coordinator of the union drive at Wynn Park.

[133] He testified that, in respect to Ms. Burris and a meeting she had with Mr. Thody referred

to in ULP 3, Mr. Rao says that he had a lengthy meeting with her on April 24, 2021, for

approximately 90 minutes. Mr. Rao testified that he sent Ms. Burris a draft Statutory

Declaration on April 26, 2021, for her review. He did not hear back from her so he decided

to put in the complaint, under his own name. He noted that as he did not hear back from

Ms. Burris, he deleted some of her comments from the final version of the affidavit. In

response to a question about why he filed the affidavit, knowing that Ms. Burris was very

upset about the contents of it, Mr. Rao said that he assumed that she was scared to file a

complaint, so he decided to file it anyway. Mr. Rao testified that he believed that she was

afraid, as she needed a reference from Mr. Thody for a job she had applied for and

thought that was the reason she did not agree to the affidavit. Mr. Rao conceded that he

did not inform the Labour Board of her retraction.

[134] Mr. Rao testified that he held the view that Wynn Park was an anti-union workplace. He

conceded that it was unusual for the union to have a car rally with a lot of media in

attendance for a union drive certification. He said that he supported the Rank and File

article, even though there may have been some inaccuracies. With respect to the

meetings he held on March 14, 2021, and March 25, 2021, were open to the public,

including anybody that may be related to management at Wynn Park.

[135] Mr. Rao testified that at the March 26, 2021, meeting people signed union cards. He

denied being disrespectful to Madison Murphy or Ms. McKay. He acknowledged that

parent/child relationships or family status should not matter and acknowledged that

Wynn Park has numerous family relationships.

Testimony of Sheila Dale

[136] Ms. Dale testified that she is an Administrative Assistant of Wynn Park and has been there

approximately 13 years. Her desk is at the main entrance way into the building. Her duties

generally are answering the phone, ordering supplies, inventory and taking minutes of

meetings for the various departments such as nursing, dietary, housekeeping etc. Ms.

Dale testified that she does not take minutes of all meetings or attend all meetings.

[137] Ms. Dale testified that the atmosphere leading up to the certification vote was tense. She

said that she got a call at her desk that Ms. Peck was on the unit without her mask so Ms.

Dale went to the East Unit with a mask for Ms. Peck. Ms. Dale located Ms. Peck sitting on

the couch with Ms. Nielsen. When she went up to give Ms. Peck her mask Ms. Dale noticed

that Ms. Nielsen, who was seated on Ms. Peck’s left side, appeared to be nervous.

[138] Ms. Dale testified that Mr. Thody had access to the video cameras posted around the

building. She testified that she saw Ms. Vaughan from the day room after a meeting with

Ms. Peck, looking very upset and anxious. Ms. Dale heard that Ms. Peck had talked to Ms.

Vaughan about the union and that Ms. Vaughan had to be loyal to Ms. Peck and also about

Ms. Vaughan whispering on the floor.

[139] Ms. Dale testified that she reports to Ms. McEwen, Director of Care. She testified that she

recalls an incident five or six years ago, where there was a lengthy article about Ms. Peck’s

son that Ms. Vaughan showed others and it was an un-favourable article about him. Ms.

Vaughan was upset about having shown it.

Testimony of Jennifer Beaver

[140] Ms. Beaver testified on her affidavit, Exhibit U-2, Tab 13, that she has worked as a CCA at

Wynn Park since it opened in May 2008. She initially worked in the West unit and moved

to the East Unit a few years ago. She testified on her first day of work in 2008, at an

orientation meeting, Ms. Peck told staff that they are a family run business and they do

not have a union and do not want one. She further testified that over her years at Wynn

Park she has been questioned 3 times about involvement in organizing a union.

[141] Ms. Beaver testified that it is common knowledge that there are familial relationships

between members of management and some staff. She noted that Ms. Peck is the mother

of Ms. Thody; one of Ms. Peck’s son is engaged to Meagan Murphy, who is the daughter

of Ms. McEwen; Ms. Thody is married to Mr. Thody; and Ms. McEwen is the mother of

Meagan Murphy and Madison Murphy.

[142] Ms. Beaver testified that on February 17, 2021, Meagan Murphy prepared a letter about

the East Unit’s staff concerns about the residents accessing the nurses’ station. Meagan

Murphy asked the CCA’s and the LPN’s to sign the letter. Ms. Beaver confirmed that she

signed the letter, along with others, and believes that it was submitted to Ms. Peck and

Ms. McEwen.

[143] Ms. Beaver testified that in the morning of February 24, 2021, Mr. Crawford advised her

that he had reached out to some unions as he believed Wynn Park should have a union.

Later that morning, Ms. Peck and Ms. Blois came to the nurses’ station and Ms. Peck

questioned Mr. Crawford about the issues in the staff letter. She testified that she

suggested, to Ms. Blois, the need for barriers at the nurses’ station, in order to keep the

residents out. Ms. Beaver said that Ms. Peck was not receptive to any suggestions from

Ms. Beaver or Mr. Crawford. Ms. Beaver testified that later on Ms. McEwen asked her to

discuss the concerns with Ms. Peck to make her understand. Ms. Beaver said that she told

Ms. McEwen that there was nothing she could do as Ms. Peck would not acknowledge

her. Ms. Beaver testified that around lunchtime that same day, Mr. Crawford told her and

Ms. Nielsen, that CUPE had responded to him, and he wanted to know if Ms. Beaver and

Ms. Nielsen would attend a meeting and be involved in a union drive. Ms. Beaver said

both she and Ms. Nielsen agreed to attend a meeting.

[144] Ms. Beaver testified that on Thursday, February 25, 2021, Mr. Crawford told her that he

had spoken to Denise MacKenzie that morning about the fact that he had raised the need

for a union with Ms. Peck. Ms. Beaver said that Mr. Crawford told her that he said to Ms.

Peck “if we had a union, we wouldn’t have this problem”.

[145] Ms. Beaver said that around 10 a.m. that same day she noticed Ms. Nielsen being very

upset and was told by Ms. Nielsen that Ms. Peck had asked Ms. Nielsen if she was happy

to be back at work. Ms. Beaver said that Ms. Nielsen told her that when she responded

yes to Ms. Peck, that Ms. Peck responded “really?” Ms. Beaver recounted what Ms.

Nielsen told her Ms. Peck had said, including questioning Ms. Nielsen about a union and

suggesting that Ms. Waldron might be aware of a union. Ms. Nielsen also told Ms. Beaver

that Ms. Peck finished the discussion by saying “this conversation never happened.” Ms.

Beaver testified that Ms. Nielsen said she felt like an abused child and that she felt Ms.

Peck had been testing her loyalty.

[146] Ms. Beaver testified that on Friday, February 26, around 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon, Mr.

Crawford texted her to say that he had received a phone call from Ms. McEwen telling

him that he had been fired. She testified she was wondering where the rest of them stood

and she thought he was fired because he had used the “U” word. Ms. Beaver said that

she did not use the full word at work as they knew by saying the word ”union” they could

get called into management’s office.

[147] Ms. Beaver further testified that on March 1, 2021, Ms. McEwen came to the East Unit

and asked her, along with Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Waldron, to come with her to the meeting

room. Once they entered, she said that Ms. McEwen closed the door and indicated to

them she wanted to let them know that Mr. Crawford had been fired. Ms. Beaver said

she already knew this because Mr. Crawford had texted her on February 26, 2021. Ms.

Beaver testified that Ms. McEwen indicated she could not give the reasons but there were

concerns that were brought to management’s attention.

[148] Ms. Beaver testified that Ms. McEwen looked over her shoulder and Ms. Beaver then

asked Ms. McEwen if she thought someone was listening to her and Ms. McEwen replied

“yes, sometimes I wonder if this room is bugged”.

[149] Ms. Beaver further testified that Ms. McEwen told them that if it had been up to her, she

would not have fired Mr. Crawford. Ms. Beaver said Ms. McEwen said, “they wrote up the

letter and made me sign it”. Ms. Beaver testified that the feedback from the employees

was shock over the firing and they were fearful to talk about the union and some

expressed concerns about getting involved with the union.

[150] Ms. Beaver testified that in the period between March 1 and March 15, 2021, she thought

she had a good rapport with Ms. MacKay and she did not think Ms. MacKay was anti-

union. However, later during the month, she found interactions with Ms. MacKay to be

out of the ordinary and around March 15, 2021, Ms. McKay stopped talking to her

altogether.

[151] Ms. Beaver testified that on Sunday, March 21, 2021, the day of the union meeting, Ms.

McEwen came down the hallway in the late morning and asked to speak to her. Ms.

Beaver said that Ms. McEwen took her into her office, closed the door, and accused her

of harassing co-workers in regard to texting information about the union, including

harassing them on their way to work. Ms. Beaver said that Ms. McEwen told her to stop

contacting people about the union and told Ms. Beaver that she was not allowed to talk

about it at work. Ms. Beaver testified that Ms. McEwen further said supervisors had told

Ms. McEwen that Ms. Beaver was going around on her breaks to talk to other staff about

the union. Ms. Beaver denied harassing any staff and inquired of Ms. McEwen who those

people were and Ms. McEwen would not share the information. Ms. Beaver said that Ms.

McEwen told her that she was a good co-worker and team player, but it did not look like

that currently.

[152] Ms. Beaver testified that she left the meeting with Ms. McEwen very upset and in tears

and was intimidated. She said she went to the union meeting at the Best Western and

just prior to the meeting Madison Murphy, Jennifer McEachern, and Ms. MacKay came

into the room. Ms. Beaver testified that she was shocked to see Madison Murphy there

and the atmosphere in the room changed as many of the people in attendance knew that

Madison Murphy and Ms. MacKay were opposed to the union drive as they had been

vocal in questioning the need for a union. Ms. Beaver said that Ms. MacKay and Julie

Groulx had been seen in Ms. Peck’s office a lot since March 1, 2021. Ms. Beaver testified

that many of the people who attended the union meeting felt that Madison Murphy

would report back to management about who was at the meeting and they were reluctant

to say anything at the meeting. Ms. Beaver said at the meeting on March 21, 2021, CUPE

staff Mr. Rao announced that the union had submitted the certification application on

March 19, 2021.

[153] Ms. Beaver testified that she heard from co-workers and later from Mr. Moore that Ms.

Rafuse’s filing cabinet had been broken into and her papers removed on March 22, 2021.

Ms. Beaver said she believed that Wynn Park, by opening Ms. Rafuse’s filing cabinet, was

sending a message to other staff about how they could be treated unfairly and have their

papers gone through and relocated if they supported the union.

[154] Ms. Beaver also testified that on the day of the vote, she heard that Ms. Dale had been

told by Ms. Peck and Ms. McEwen that she was not allowed to vote and Ms. Dale left

work early, upset. Ms. Beaver testified that she became aware of a personal Facebook

post by Ms. Peck which was posted on March 31, 2021, which she found out about on

April 1, 2021, which has the wording, “unfortunately, karma is going to hit some of ya’ll

for breaking people who have nothing but good intentions for you”. Ms. Beaver referred

to Exhibit B of her affidavit with that posting. She said she was frightened as she knew

how Ms. Peck treated those that supported the union and she was afraid she would be

targeted.

[155] Ms. Beaver further testified that on April 7, 2021, Ms. McEwan and Denise MacKenzie

went into the East Unit meeting room after 3:00 p.m. when she, Ms. Nielsen, and Ms.

Waldron were having their break and Ms. MacKenzie had a list of things she wanted to

discuss. In particular, that their breaks were too long; they were not starting the day early

enough; and Ms. McEwen was concerned about the atmosphere in the East Unit and for

the residents as she indicated no one wanted to come to work on that unit. Ms. Beaver

testified that Ms. McEwen said they were reluctant to put students on the unit because

of the negativity.

[156] Ms. Beaver testified that Ms. Nielsen said at the meeting that she wanted to apologize to

anyone she had offended and Ms. McEwen replied “if it was you [Elaine], I would have

pulled you into my office and spoke to you about it”. Ms. Beaver said when Ms. McEwen

said those words she was looking directly at Ms. Beaver.

[157] Ms. Beaver testified that Ms. McEwen turned directly to her and pointed and said, “You

have been the one most passionate about this and so angry. We are not used to you acting

like this”. She testified that Ms. McEwen indicated that her daughters, Megan and

Madison Murphy, had been afraid to come to work.

[158] Ms. Beaver testified that Ms. McEwen asked them why, if they had issues, they did not

come to management and questioned why they wanted a union and asked them if they

were unhappy. She said Ms. McEwen asked why they were not happy. Ms. Beaver

testified that both she and Ms. Nielsen indicated that it was because Mr. Crawford had

been let go and they were worried that people may be fired without a reason being given.

[159] Ms. Beaver testified that she did not think the atmosphere had changed amongst the

workers on the unit and they were not acting rudely to anyone. She testified she believed

that she, Ms. Waldron and Ms. Nielsen were targeted and treated differently and unfairly

due to their support of being unionized and the fact that they provided information to

CUPE that was used in its complaints against Wynn Park.

Testimony of Dianne Vaughan

[160] Ms. Vaughan testified she is a registered nurse and has worked at Wynn Park for

approximately 11 years. She testified that when she started work at Wynn Park in 2010

she had no idea about Wynn Park’s views on unions. She testified Ms. Beaver had told her

that unions were discouraged by management.

[161] Ms. Vaughan testified she became aware that Mr. Crawford was looking into the

possibility of unionizing and he had spoken to her about her support before he was

terminated. She testified she did not work with Mr. Crawford as he was on another floor

and she had no issues with him. She said she found out he was terminated when he texted

her, but he did not say why he was terminated. She testified she was never told by

management the reason for terminating Mr. Crawford.

[162] Ms. Vaughan testified that at a supervisor’s meeting on March 16, 2021, Ms. McEwen said

she heard some supervisors were whispering in the hallways and some people were upset

about being called by the union and felt bullied. Ms. Vaughan testified that she, Ms.

Vaughan, raised concerns at that meeting that staff were intimidated and upset that Ms.

Peck was coming onto the units and talking to staff privately. Ms. Vaughan testified that

at the supervisors meeting on March 16, 2021, Ms. McEwen said RNs could not vote as

they were supervisors and were part of management.

[163] Ms. Vaughan said that in the afternoon of March 16, 2021, Ms. Peck came to her when

she was working in the adult day room and told her to sit next to her on the sofa. Ms.

Peck then informed Ms. Vaughan that people had seen her whispering in the hall and Ms.

Peck felt she was supporting the union. She also testified Ms. Peck inquired of her why

she wanted a union. Ms. Vaughan testified that she felt terrible following her meeting

with Ms. Peck and felt she was being told how to vote and that she could not be neutral

and was expected to support management.

[164] Ms. Vaughan testified that she told Ms. Peck that she remained neutral and Ms. Peck

replied if people were not happy and they want a union, then they could leave. Ms.

Vaughan testified that Ms. Peck questioned her about her loyalty and Ms. Peck said when

loyalty is gone, the trust is gone. Ms. Vaughan testified that Ms. Peck repeated several

times to her that she must support management and she cannot sit on the fence and if

asked by staff, question them on what a union can do for them that they do not have

now.

[165] Ms. Vaughan testified that she believed Ms. Peck felt all RNs were against the union and

Ms. Peck never mentioned anything about her performance and did not make a

suggestion as to why Ms. Peck has heard from staff that she was hiding out in the adult

room and needed to get out more on the floor.

[166] Ms. Vaughan testified she was shocked when Ms. Peck, prior to leaving the room told her,

“and this conversation never happened, right”. She testified she told Ms. Rafuse about

the conversation with Ms. Peck as she was so distraught.

[167] Ms. Vaughan testified that she was an infection, prevention and control nurse at Wynn

Park and reported to Ms. McEwen and this position came about in the Fall of 2020 and

was a government funded position resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. She

acknowledged part of her duties were to update infection control binders in accordance

with the new information about COVID-19, educate staff and keep staff updated on any

government changes, and as such, she had a temporary work space set up in the adult

day room. She acknowledged she used the adult day room for that work and in providing

support and education to staff.

[168] Ms. Vaughan testified that Ms. McEwen said to her that some staff had not seen her on

the units much and that she was spending a lot of time in the adult day room. She

testified, however, on March 16, 2021, when Ms. Peck spoke to her in the adult day room,

she never mentioned anything about Ms. Vaughan spending too much time in that room

and not enough on the floor units.

[169] Ms. Vaughan further testified she knew there was a lot of tension on the floors, but denies

Ms. Peck talked to her about hiding out in the basement because she did not want to be

asked about the union.

[170] Ms. Vaughan testified she retired from her position at Wynn Park by way of resignation

on May 23, 2021.

[171] Ms. Vaughan testified on recall by counsel for Wynn Park, after being shown a CCTV

footage, Exhibit R-6, from March 17, 2021. It was stated that Mr. Thody had obtained, at

the instruction of Ms. Peck, the video in question, which appeared to show Ms. Vaughan

removing the contents of her purse and taking a box of band aids and placing them in a

plastic bag and putting them in her purse and then replacing the contents she had taken

out of the purse on top of the band aids in her purse. Ms. Vaughan testified that she had

placed the band aids in a plastic bag so that she would notice them and taken the band

aids up to the north unit Med Cart. She said her wallet was placed on the top along with

the plastic bag and she said she never stole anything from her employer and she was very

disturbed that an accusation could be made and a blemish put on her work record by her

employer. She testified the incident recorded on camera was in full view of video

surveillance which she knew was present and there would be no reason for her to steal

band aids. She said that did not happen.

[172] Ms. Vaughan testified it would not be unusual to take some supplies from time to time to

a unit to replenish the Med Cart notwithstanding it was not her responsibility. She said

she would never steal anything and denied doing so and she felt blindsided by the actions

of Wynn Park in raising that matter.

[173] Ms. Vaughan also testified she apologized to Ms. Peck about an article that was in a

publication which had negative comments about Ms. Peck’s son that she had brought to

work and shown to other staff. She testified that the incident took place a few years ago

and she thought that matter had been dealt with between her and Ms. Peck.

[174] There was an objection raised by counsel for the Union that Ms. Vaughan should not have

been recalled as there was no new information. Counsel for Wynn Park indicated he just

found about this information over a lunch break and wanted the video presented, but this

could have been presented during direct examination as this was information Wynn Park

had in its possession for some time as the video was from March 17, 2021, and could have

been shown to Ms. Vaughan earlier. Mr. Proctor argued credibility is an issue and

especially that of Ms. Vaughan and it goes to weight and he did not learn of the video

until Ms. Vaughan testified.

[175] The Board ruled that the evidence of Ms. Vaughan on recall goes to credibility and the

Board will determine what weight will be given to the evidence provided on recall.

Testimony of Morgan Macumber

[176] Ms. Macumber testified she started working at Wynn Park in 2015 and was hired as a

dietary aid and became a CCA in 2016. She testified that in March of 2021, while at the

nurses’ station, she was approached by Ms. Peck who wanted to know what her vote was.

Ms. Macumber testified that Ms. Peck told her to be there for the vote, which Ms.

Macumber understood as Ms. Peck believed she would be against the union. Ms.

Macumber testified that when she did not immediately reply, Ms. Peck said “well I do,

don’t I?” Ms. Macumber testified that she was confused and uncomfortable and did not

feel she had to discuss her vote as it was supposed to be confidential. Ms. Macumber said

she told Ms. Cameron, who was also at the nurses’ station, about the conversation with

Ms. Peck and said she was very upset.

[177] Ms. Macumber testified on cross examination that she has a nursing degree from St. FX

and she got her RN shortly after that. She said she heard of the CUPE organizing campaign

from Facebook and Ms. Beaver had asked her if she wanted a union card with CUPE. Ms.

Macumber testified that she did not follow the Wynn Park Facebook page, nor did she

follow the CUPE Facebook page.

[178] Ms. Macumber testified that prior to Ms. Peck coming to the nurses’ station, she never

discussed with Ms. Peck any union matter and never told her how she was going to vote.

Ms. Macumber testified her mother used to work at Wynn Park and she did overlap with

her mother when she was in housekeeping.

Wynn Park Witnesses

[179] Wynn Park called a total of 9 witnesses.

Testimony of Julie White

[180] Ms. White testified she works at Wynn Park and would have been there 3 years in August,

2021. She works in Housekeeping, where she cleans the North Unit primarily. It involves

sanitizing, cleaning Residents rooms and offices. Ms. White testified that she created a

Facebook page for Wynn Park. It was her idea alone to create it for the purpose of inviting

others to express comments, especially during Covid-19 which was a rough year. She

wanted to spread positivity amongst the staff.

[181] Ms. White testified that management did not threaten her about how she was to vote in

the upcoming union vote. Mr. Thody, Director of Support Services, was her supervisor

and asked her to give evidence in this hearing. Ms. White testified that she did not see

any affidavits or documents before coming to testify. Mr. Thody did not tell her what

other people were saying.

[182] Ms. White testified that the first time she heard any talk about the union was around

February 24, 2021, in the East Unit nurses’ station. Mr. Crawford had a conversation with

her, but she did not tell anyone about the conversation. The next day when she spoke

with Ms. McKay, Ms. McKay told her that Mr. Crawford wanted a union at Wynn Park.

Ms. White believed it was a couple of days after that that she spoke to Ms. Beaver and

Ms. Nielsen about her conversation with Mr. Crawford. Ms. White testified that she did

not get the notice/invitation for the March 21, 2021, union meeting.

[183] Ms. White testified that she believed that Ms. McKay did not want the union at Wynn

Park and neither did Ms. White. She also believed that management did not want a union

at Wynn Park. Ms. White referred to Exhibit U-14, noting that it did not say to Facebook

users to vote no. She was of the belief that Wynn Park was not allowed to tell employees

how to vote. Ms. White said management never spoke to her about the Facebook page.

Many in management, including Ms. Peck and others, indicated they liked the comments.

She says that on March 25, 2021, it was seen on Facebook in reference to ”support today,

go to vote”. She did not say go to vote no for a union at Wynn Park.

Testimony of Lisa Smith

[184] Ms. Smith testified she was appearing under subpoena. She is the CEO at Glen Haven

Manor, New Glasgow and will have been there for 14 years this coming November (2021).

She testified that a former employee, Mr. Crawford, was employed there beginning July

20, 2018, first as a casual employee and becoming a permanent employee on June 20,

2019. Ms. Smith testified that on March 31, 2019, there was an incident whereby they

had to send Mr. Crawford home as he had taken 5 needles and five syringes from the

supply room. Mr. Crawford admitted to doing so and said he was taking it for his girlfriend.

Ms. Smith testified that Mr. Crawford falsified an incident report wherein a vial had

broken. There was an investigation undertaken between April and May, 2019 and there

was a finding of breach of trust. On May 22, 2019, he was terminated from Glen Haven

Manor for cause, with the caveat that they would accept his resignation. Ms. Smith

testified that as of April 1, 2019, Mr. Crawford would have been aware that he was in

trouble, specifically that he had breached the trust and confidence of management.

[185] Ms. Smith further testified that only managers can supply job references. The references

that Mr. Crawford used at Wynn Park, namely, Aran Gallur and Kim Rafuse, were not

authorized by Glen Haven Manor and they had no authority to give a reference.

[186] Ms. Smith referred to a settlement agreement, Exhibit R-3, dated June 28, 2019, signed

by Mr. Crawford. She testified that the union at Glen Haven Manor knew that Mr.

Crawford was being terminated. Ms. Smith further testified that Mr. Crawford would not

have received a reference from Glen Haven Manor as management had determined that

there was a breach of trust and confidence in him as an employee that they could not

support.

Testimony of Rebecca McKay

[187] Ms. McKay testified that she has been at Wynn Park since 2019, as a recreational

coordinator and part of her duties are to plan programs for residents for their well-being,

including exercise, trivia, outings etc. She testified she works in all the units and said that

in the February to March 2021 time period Mr. Crawford, was an LPN but also supervised

recreation.

[188] Ms. McKay testified about allegations of back rubbing and other matters pertaining to

Mr. Crawford. She referred to Exhibit R-1, Tab 21, which are notes she took at the nurses’

station about instances where Mr. Crawford asked residents to rub his back, made

comments about other staff etc. She acknowledged on cross-examination that she, on

some occasions, had received back rubs from residents and she was not disciplined. Also,

both she and Madison Murphy had used cell phones at work and were not disciplined.

[189] Ms. McKay said she attended the Best Western meeting on March 21, 2021, believing

from the Facebook notice that it was for Wynn Park employees to attend to learn about

union benefits. Ms. McKay said that there were some employees of Wynn Park that were

sworn in and signed union cards. Ms. McKay testified that Mr. Rao moderated the

meeting of March 21, 2021, and she found him disrespectful when he refused to answer

questions from Madison Murphy. Ms. McKay referred to an email that she sent to CUPE,

dated March 30, 2021, Exhibit U-23, complaining about the disrespect showed by Mr. Rao

at the union meeting she attended. Ms. McKay indicated on cross-examination that while

she had referred to harassment by union supporters in her email March 25, 2021, to

CUPE, she could not state who may have been harassed and confirmed that she was not

harassed.

Testimony of Zoe Lindsay

[190] Ms. Lindsay testified that she has worked at Wynn Park as a cook since 2008. She was

previously a cook at West Side Villa. She testified that she reports to Mr. Thody. Other

than this current union activity in 2021 she does not recall any union campaign prior to

this campaign.

[191] Ms. Lindsay testified that she does not recall management ever talking about being a non-

union facility or seeing any signs to that effect. At one point Ms. Peck was in the kitchen

and a question was raised about whether, if the union got in, it would affect their

pensions. Ms. Peck said she would check into it and get back and later confirmed that

their pensions would be safe.

[192] Ms. Lindsay was referred to notes of a meeting from March 19, 2021, Exhibit U-24, which

meeting was held by Mr. Thody to talk about dietary and housekeeping issues. Again, the

issue of pensions came up and Mr. Thody said that he would ask Ms. Peck if pensions

would be protected. Ms. Lindsay testified that Mr. Thody did not tell anybody how to or

what way to vote and he said that it was their own personal decision

[193] In reference to Exhibit U-14, the Facebook page for Wynn Park, Ms. Lindsay testified that

Ms. White invited her to the group. Ms. Lindsay testified that there was a lot of anxiety

about the union vote coming up. Ms. Lindsay interpreted the Facebook page, where it

says ‘don’t forget to vote’ as Ms. White trying to get people to make sure they voted, not

to tell them how to vote. Ms. Lindsay said she was never harassed by the union.

Testimony of Marc Thody

[194] Mr. Thody testified that he is the Director of Support Services and has worked at Wynn

Park since November 2008. During his employment at Wynn Park he was not aware of

any other union drives and there was no talk of management opposing a union. With

respect to IT matters, he is responsible for the video cameras, which include ones on the

main floor, hallway, foyer and back door. The cameras are for the safety of residents. Each

nurses’ station has cameras. He testified that he was asked by Ms. Peck, as a result of a

meeting with Ms. Peck and Mr. Crawford on February 24, 2021, to get a copy of the video

of Mr. Crawford’s shifts on February 20, 2021, and February 21, 2021. He confirmed that

there is no audio attached to the video. Mr. Thody was asked by Ms. Peck to review the

videos to see whether or not he was concerned that Ms. Vaughan did not spend enough

time on the floor in the adult room. Mr. Thody testified that he noted that Mr. Crawford

was away from the nurses’ station without anybody being in attendance to watch over

that area including the Med Room. In particular he noted that Mr. Crawford left for a

period of time with a female co-worker and entered in a room, closing the door behind

them. He testified that he supplied those video tapes to Ms. Peck. The video from

February 25, 2021, were overwritten prior to his being asked for them.

[195] With respect to Ms. Burris who worked in housekeeping, Mr. Thody testified that as of

July 2020, she was a casual employee. In February 2021, Ms. Burris became a full time

employee, required to complete 70 hours bi-weekly. Mr. Thody said all employees are on

a probation period when they start. In April 2021, Ms. Burris was increased to 80 hours

bi-weekly. In a meeting with Ms. Burris on April 21, 2021, they discussed a letter he had

sent her regarding a requirement for 80 hours bi-weekly. Mr. Thody testified that the

policy was that attendance had to be a minimum of 96.1% and Ms. Burris was averaging

87%. In support of his testimony Mr. Thody referred to Exhibit R-8 which are the time

sheets of Ms. Burris.

[196] Mr. Thody referred to Exhibit R-1, Tab 26 which is a copy of the notes he took when he

met with Ms. Burris to advise her that she had to increase her hours. He also noted that

while her probation was not being extended, it could be extended if her hours were not

increased. Mr. Thody said that at the meeting when he provided the memo to her that

the discussion with her was not a punitive discussion - it was just to try to get her up to

96.1%.

[197] Mr. Thody testified that he had never heard that Ms. Burris ever reported her locker being

broken into. In regard to Ms. Burris’ absences, he testified that he understood her

absences were due to illnesses or the fact that she could not get to work due to road

conditions. Mr. Thody testified that he was aware that she had applied for a school board

job and asked him for reference, which he gave her. He noted that he believed that she

resigned to take a job at the school board and does not recall if she worked after she gave

her notice. Mr. Thody did not recall ever giving a letter of reference since Ms. Burris left

her employment.

[198] He had separate staff meetings on March 17, 2021, with housekeeping and dietary to go

over team matters. At neither meeting did he tell staff how to vote on union certification

[199] Mr. Thody testified that he never heard Ms. Peck ever say she did not want a union. Nor

did he ever hear it at committee meetings. Mr. Thody testified that he first heard about

a union drive on March 3, 2021, from Ms. Peck who told him about the possibility. He

testified that the suggestion box was set up for suggestions - it was not a voting box for

the union campaign.

[200] Mr. Thody was referred to the Facebook page created by Ms. White, Exhibit U-14. He said

that his wife uses Facebook but he does not.

[201] In cross examination Mr. Thody was asked about Ms. Blois recording a telephone call with

Ms. Burris. He said he does not know where or when that happened, and he never helped

Ms. Blois set it up or record the call. Mr. Thody testified that, with respect to Ms.

Vaughan’s video, he was asked on March 18, 2021, by Ms. Peck, to download it. He said

Ms. Peck never said she was downloading Ms. Vaughan’s video to test her loyalty. Mr.

Thody testified that he never looked at the Facebook photos of the Union meeting nor

did Ms. Peck ever talk to him about people on the Facebook page. He testified that he

could not recall when he knew about Mr. Crawford being terminated. He believed that

either Ms. Peck and or Ms. McEwen advised him. At no time did Ms. McEwen tell Mr.

Thody that she had no reason to fire Mr. Crawford. He was referred to Exhibit U-1, Tab 4,

which is the letter of termination, and he confirmed that he had not seen it.

Testimony of Teresa McEwen

[202] Ms. McEwen testified that she has worked at Wynn Park for 7 years and she is currently

the Director of Care and is also a registered nurse. Ms. McEwen testified that she reports

to Ms. Peck, Wynn Park Administrator.

[203] Ms. McEwen testified that she had never heard of any previous union drives nor any

general discussion about unions. She said she had never seen anything posted regarding

any negativity towards unions at Wynn Park and explained that when the candidates

asked about a union during their initial hiring meeting she would indicate that Wynn Park

is not unionized.

[204] Ms. McEwen testified that she was involved with the hiring process of Mr. Crawford,

including conducting the interview. She testified that the interview took place in her office

in early May of 2019 and Ms. Blois was present for the entire interview. The notes from

the interview said that Mr. Crawford apologized for being late for the appointment as he

was stopped by the police for using a cell phone. Ms. McEwen testified that Mr. Crawford

never mentioned during the interview process that he was suspended or under

investigation at Glen Haven Manor, nor did he indicate he misappropriated needles or

falsified a report. Ms. McEwen testified that if he had told her about those issues, she

would not have hired him. Ms. McEwen said that she checked 2 references that were

provided by Mr. Crawford, one from Kim Rafuse and the other from Aran Gallur. Ms.

McEwen testified that she thought that Aran Gallur was Mr. Crawford’s supervisor at Glen

Haven Manor. She further testified that she did not speak with senior management at

Glen Haven Manor. Ms. McEwen testified that she would not always do that as she

expects the applicants to be truthful with information they provide in their interview.

[205] Ms. McEwen testified that she had a few issues with Mr. Crawford during his

employment. She recalled an incident where he was upset that patient was in palliative

care and he informed her that he did not believe that patient needed palliative care

withstanding it was on a physician recommendation. Mr. Crawford told Ms. McEwen that

the nurse did not make the right decision to put her in Palliative care. Mr. Crawford, upon

learning that the patient had passed away, apologized to her for his remarks.

[206] Ms. McEwen testified that she disciplined Mr. Crawford on one occasion, along with the

CPA that he supervised, after it was reported that he spent time in a closed room with

her, for approximately half an hour. She referred to Exhibit R-1, Tab 10, which is a written

copy of a verbal warning. Ms. McEwen testified that she contacted Mr. Thody to check

the cameras to verify if Mr. Crawford was in fact spending time at the nurses’ station,

after seeing that he was in the room for 20 minutes, which is not normal. Ms. McEwen

approached Mr. Crawford and he admitted to the incident with the CPA. Ms. McEwen

advised him that the optics did not look good and that it was unacceptable. She gave both

Mr. Crawford and the CPA a warning.

[207] Ms. McEwen testified that it is a serious breach of policy to leave the Med Room door

open as well as leaving the Med Cart unattended as they both have items such as

narcotics, alcohol, and other medications for residents. This is especially importation as

some of the residents have a tendency to wander into the nurses’ station. Ms. McEwen

testified that Ms. Peck and Ms. Blois met with Mr. Crawford to deal with concerns

surrounding the patients entering the nurses’ station and Mr. Crawford wanted to have

Plexiglass installed for better security to keep the residents out of the nurses’ station. At

that time there was just a retractable band that went across the opening, easily removed

by residents and often times the retractable band was left open.

[208] Ms. McEwen testified that when watching the videos of Mr. Crawford, she witnessed him

sitting at his desk and not helping the nursing staff.

[209] Ms. McEwen testified that she was asked by Ms. Peck to terminate Mr. Crawford. She

referred to Exhibit R-1 Tab 8, the termination letter from February 26, 2021, that she

signed. She said that prior to signing it, she had a discussion with Ms. Peck and Ms. Blois

as to the wording. Ms. Peck wanted something included in the letter about Mr. Crawford

showing a lack of trust and being unworthy. Ms. Blois wanted something more short and

simple. Ms. McEwen testified that she called Mr. Crawford on Friday as the letter would

not get to him until Monday. She told him over the phone that he was terminated, and

he had asked for reasons and she said for privacy she could not give them at that time.

[210] Ms. McEwen testified that she had a staff meeting on March 1, 2021, informing Ms.

Waldron, Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Beaver to inform them that Mr. Crawford was no longer

employed at Wynn Park. She denied saying to the staff that she was concerned about the

room being bugged, or that she never agreed to terminate Mr. Crawford. Ms. McEwen

also said that there was no discussion about a union at that meeting at all.

[211] On March 4, 2021, Ms. McEwen was delivering a letter to staff, Exhibit U-1, Tab 7, in

person, including posting it on a bulletin board. At one point Ms. MacKenzie asked Ms.

McEwen if all staff could join the union and Ms. McEwen indicated that she did not know

the answers and she would try to obtain that for them. She testified that during that

interaction she did not tell the staff how to vote and would never do that. She remained

neutral. Ms. McEwen denied that, on March 5, 2021, she told Ms. Rafuse that she could

not be in the union. Ms. McEwen testified that she did not say to anyone, including

supervisors, that they were ineligible to join the union.

[212] Ms. McEwen testified that, on March 16, 2021, she was at a meeting, the notes of which

are at Exhibit R-1, Tab 18, with Ms. Vaughan, Janet Stone, Ms. Rafuse and Ms. Mackenzie.

Ms. McEwen said that the meeting was with rotational staff and there was some

questions raised concerning whispering in the hallways by supervisors. It was noted that

the morale was low at the time and staff seemed nervous when Ms. Peck was around,

but she was the administrator. There was no discussion from management about

supporting the union. Ms. McEwen met later with Ms. Rafuse in her office, as Ms. McEwen

was concerned that there was campaigning being done on work time and Ms. Rafuse

indicated that the union official told her that she was allowed to on her breaks.

[213] Ms. McEwen testified that, with respect to Ms. Rafuse missing things out of a filing

cabinet, there were no assigned filing cabinets to any LPN’s or RN’s. She said that there

was a Department of Health Audit and they had to check all filing cabinets and charts. Ms.

McEwen said that all the documents and items from the filing cabinet that Ms. Rafuse

used were moved but that she did not look at any documents or items unrelated to Wynn

Park or its residents.

[214] Ms. McEwen noted that Wynn Park management were always respectful to staff and no

comment was made about them wanting to join the union or not. She said that no

coercion was applied or threats made to prevent from them joining a union.

[215] Ms. McEwen testified that she had a meeting with Ms. Beaver, Ms. Nielsen and Ms.

Waldron on April 7, 2021, with Denise MacKenzie present, to discuss their arrival time at

work and the length of their breaks. She said the meeting was a discussion and was not a

reprimand. She denied intimidating them and says that there was no union issue

discussed.

[216] On cross examination Ms. McEwen said that she had not seen any CCA’s or LPN’s use a

cell phone on the floor during work. She acknowledged that it may have occurred. With

respect to Mr. Crawford she never disciplined him for any use of a cell phone while on

duty. She testified that with respect to the February 19, 2021, letter to Ms. Peck from

staff with their safety concerns, she found a copy of that letter in her mailbox.

[217] With respect to paragraph 34 in Mr. Crawford’s affidavit, Exhibit U-8, Ms. McEwen said

that she did not hear him say anything regarding a union.

[218] Ms. McEwen also said she did not recall Ms. Peck saying to Ms. Vaughan or Ms. Rafuse

that they had to support Wynn Park or support management. Ms. McEwen never pointed

a finger at staff, or intimidated them in any way with respect to how to vote.

[219] Ms. McEwen testified that she understood that Ms. Blois had reviewed the tapes of Mr.

Crawford from February 20, 2021, and February 21, 2021, and told Ms. McEwen that the

tape showed Mr. Crawford was careless in leaving the Med Cart, Med Room and nurses’

station unattended. Ms. McEwen said those incidents, along with the incident involving

the co-worker and Mr. Crawford going into a room together, made Ms. Blois determine

that he was untrustworthy. Ms. Blois, Ms. Peck and Ms. McEwen then decided to

terminate him.

[220] Ms. McEwen conceded that Mr. Crawford and his co-worker were not suspended for the

impropriety of spending time alone during the evening shift in the room. She denies

saying in the March 1, 2021, meeting that the room might be bugged or that she did not

agree with the termination of Mr. Crawford. Those statements were referred to in the

affidavits Ms. Waldron, Ms. Beaver and Ms. MacKenzie and also in the affidavit of Ms.

Nielsen.

Testimony of Cassie Blois

[221] Ms. Blois testified that she is the HR Manager for Wynn Park. She started as a Scheduling

Ward Clerk in May 2009, a year after Wynn Park opened in June 2008. She testified that

she has been Human Resource Manager since 2014, and works with all department

managers. She reports to Ms. Peck, the Administrator.

[222] Ms. Blois testified that it is policy that staff attendance be at least 96.1%. Management

meet with staff on a quarterly basis to go over their attendance requirements.

Management go over any concerns they have that the staff do not meet those standards

to assist the staff.

[223] Ms. Blois testified that she is involved in the recruitment of new hires, including job

postings, email, coordinating interviews, taking notes and writes all employment related

letters, such as disciplinary letters. Ms. Blois testified that she has never, since she has

worked at Wynn Park, seen any negativity towards unions. She has never seen any

signage at Wynn Park, complaints from employees, about unionization. She said when

people are hired if they ask about unions she indicates to the hires that Wynn Park is non-

unionized. However, she says she does not recall if it has ever been raised.

[224] Ms. Blois testified that she first heard of the rally on or about March 3, 2021, from a copy

of the Rank and File article. With respect to a meeting with Mr. Crawford on February 24,

2021, about the safety issues that were raised by staff, Ms. Blois testified that staff

wanted to try to keep residents out of the nurses’ station and were requesting Plexiglas

or some other type of structure, to create a barrier for the 2 entrances. Ms. Blois said that

Ms. Peck did not want Plexiglas as this was the resident’s home and it was too intrusive.

The conversation with staff was not heated, but rather focused on problem solving and

suggestions. There was no talk of union at all, just safety concerns. There also was some

concern that they needed extra staff. Ms. Peck said the funding comes from the

Department of Health and Wellness and it would be unlikely. The main concern was with

extra staff for the night shift.

[225] Ms. Blois testified that, in regard to the termination of Mr. Crawford, Ms. Peck asked her

to write up the termination letter. Ms. Blois said she did discuss it also with Ms. McEwen

who was in agreement. Ms. Peck found that after watching the videos of Mr. Crawford

and the issue with Mr. Crawford’s female co-worker, and leaving the Med Cart

unattended in the Med Room area, and that Med Room door open and unattended, that

she found him to be untrustworthy. Ms. Blois testified that those were the main reasons

for his termination. She said that the letter was not scheduled to be delivered by courier

until Monday. As such, Ms. McEwen decided to call Mr. Crawford on Friday afternoon to

let him know of the termination letter.

[226] Ms. Blois testified that Mr. Crawford applied for a LPN position and he was interviewed

on May 1, 2021 in Ms. McEwen’s office. Ms. McEwen conducted the interview while Ms.

Blois was present. Ms. Blois estimated the interview took approximately 15 minutes.

Wynn Park had his references and his resume. Mr. Crawford indicated that he was still

working at Glenn Haven Manor. Ms. Blois testified that Mr. Crawford indicated that he

wanted to pursue his RN designation. As well, Ms. Blois said that Mr. Crawford told them

that his girlfriend was going to attend Community College in Truro. Ms. Blois testified that

Mr. Crawford never disclosed that he was suspended and under investigation for

misappropriating needles or failing to complete an incident report at his place of

employment. She further testified that she did not leave the interview early. She was

there for the entire interview process. Ms. Blois identified Exhibit R1 Tab 8, which is the

termination letter to Mr. Crawford dated February 26, 2021, as the letter she prepared.

[227] Ms. Blois testified that Ms. Burris, a former employee, resigned April 25, 2021. Ms. Blois

referred to Ms. Burris’ resignation email, Exhibit R-11. Ms. Blois referred to Exhibit R-8

being an attendance report for Ms. Burris between January 21, 2021, and March 31, 2021.

Wynn Park has an attendance requirement of 96.1% and Ms. Burris was 87.7%. Ms. Blois

forwarded that attendance record to Mr. Thody, Director of Support Services, who met

with Ms. Burris to go over her attendance. Ms. Blois testified that Ms. Burris was not

disciplined, but just made aware of her attendance requirements. Ms. Blois testified that

she had a good working relationship with Ms. Burris. Ms. Burris had come to Ms. Blois

confidentially on April 28, 2021, as her lock was missing on her locker in the locker room.

Ms. Blois asked Ms. Burris to put the incident in writing, but Ms. Burris did not want to do

that.

[228] Ms. Blois testified that Ms. Burris texted her that she wanted to call Ms. Blois because she

had heard there was an unfair labour practice filed and that Ms. Burris was named in the

document. Ms. Blois testified that she recorded the phone call with Ms. Burris. Ms. Blois

referred to Exhibit R-1 Tab 2, which is a transcript of the call. Ms. Blois testified that Ms.

Burris was not aware of the recording of the call and referred to Exhibit R-1, Tab 1 as the

audio of the call and Exhibit R-1, Tab 2 being the transcript of her call. Ms. Blois testified

that she was very upset that her name was being used in an affidavit filed in an unfair

labour practice complaint by Mr. Rao. Ms. Blois testified that Ms. Burris told her that she

had contacted a friend at Patterson Law, who was prepared to file an affidavit to have it

removed as most of the contents of the affidavit filed by Mr. Rao in reference to what Ms.

Burris had said was not true. Ms. Blois testified that Wynn Park would offer to reimburse

Ms. Burris for legal counsel to prepare an affidavit, if she wanted to pursue it.

[229] Ms. Blois testified that during the pandemic it was a stressful time as they had to juggle

things with staff, supplies and morale was down generally. She said Wynn Park had a pizza

party in March following staff suggestions. Wynn Park put in a staff suggestion box for

staff comments. Wynn Park felt that the pizza party could boost morale. Ms. Blois said it

was decided and planned well before they knew that the Labour Board had picked a vote

day.

[230] Ms. Blois testified that five to six times a year she would socialize with Ms. Peck. They

went away on a shopping trip three or four years ago and a trip to Myrtle Beach in 2017

and Edmonton in 2018. Ms. Blois was part of the management group that went on these

trips but they socialized with Ms. Peck’s brother and sister-in-law and nieces.

[231] Ms. Blois testified there was no mention of unionization by management that she is aware

of or by staff prior to the Rank and File article. She testified that Ms. Peck never asked her

to pull Mr. Crawford’s personnel file after she saw the videos given to Ms. Peck by Mr.

Thody. With respect to the recording of the telephone call with Ms. Burris, Ms. Blois said

she did not inform Ms. Burris that she was going to be recorded. Ms. Blois said that she

did not check with Ms. Peck to see if she could record it without Ms. Burris’ consent.

[232] Ms. Blois testified that with regard to the pizza party she never consulted with Ms. Peck.

She ordered the pizza, preplanned. She said that during COVID-19 they would order ice

cream cake, KFC, and pizza two or three times with the night staff.

[233] Ms. Blois testified that she was never asked by Ms. Peck to look at any personnel file on

Ms. Vaughan or Ms. Dale or any other employees. She testified that she did not check any

references from Glen Haven Manor for Mr. Crawford, nor with the HR people at Glen

Haven Manor. She acknowledged on redirect that many people that worked at Wynn Park

were related to others. Over the years staffing can be difficult and in a small town, it is

not unusual in their type of business to have staff that are related to one another.

[234] On cross-examination Ms. Blois was referred to video footage of the nurses’ station on

the East Unit, Exhibit U-35, and she said that, although she was not in close proximity to

the conversation between Ms. Peck and Mr. Crawford, she believed she was within a few

feet and she could hear their conversation. She testified that at no time did she hear Mr.

Crawford use the word ‘union’. Ms. Blois testified that, with regard to the February 17,

2021, staff letter with staff concerns that was discussed at the February 24, 2021, with

Ms. Peck and Mr. Crawford, she only saw the letter at that meeting, however Ms. Peck

had previously told her about it.

Testimony of Sheila Peck

[235] Ms. Peck testified on behalf of the employer. She is the administrator and part owner of

Wynn Park in Truro, which opened in 2008. Ms. Peck said that Wynn Park is not unionized

but that she has been involved with the unionized business of Tower View and was

involved in the certification process there. She said she has an open door policy with

residents and staff at Wynn Park. There is an employee assistance program for staff. She

testified that it was a scary and stressful time operating during the COVID-19 pandemic

and staff found it very stressful. Ms. Peck testified that the management team at Wynn

Park consists of Ms. Blois, Human Resources Director; Ms. McEwen, Director of Care; Mr.

Thody, who supervises services such as housekeeping and dietary; Ms. Thody who works

in the business office; and Ms. Dale who answers the phone, delivers diapers to the floors,

takes some notes in some meetings and does blood runs to the hospitals.

[236] Ms. Peck testified that the Department of Health inspects the facility for high standards.

She said it is very exhaustive when the inspectors come. They usually come unannounced.

She testified that Wynn Park is funded by the Department of Health. Staffing, food

supplies, salaries/wages are set by the Department of Health.

[237] Ms. Peck said that Wynn Park has been in business for 13 years and has a waiting list and

a very good reputation. She testified that she is not aware of any prior union attempts at

Wynn Park. She is aware of the unionization process as she was involved in the process

at other places that she worked. Ms. Peck testified that she has never disciplined anybody

for union talk and never put up any anti-union signs on her premises. She testified that

there were names of former employees raised by the Union, of people who did not testify,

that had either left Wynn Park or been terminated for reasons unrelated to any potential

union activity.

[238] Ms. Peck testified that she first learned of the CUPE campaign around March 3, 2021,

after Wynn Park had terminated Mr. Crawford. Ms. Thody informed Ms. Peck that Mr.

Crawford went to the media and told her about the Rank and File article, Exhibit R-1 Tab

14, which included comments from Mr. Crawford. Ms. Peck said the article was incorrect

and that Mr. Crawford was not terminated for any union activity. She did not know about

any unionization attempts at that time. Ms. Peck testified that Mr. Crawford was

terminated for being careless and untrustworthy in leaving the Med Room open and

leaving the Med Cart unattended on numerous occasions. Ms. Peck testified that she has

never intimidated any of her staff or workers and she was very upset over the article in

the Rank and File. She said it affected her business and reputation.

[239] Ms. Peck testified about the CUPE car rally, referred to in Exhibit R-1 Tab 15, in support

of Mr. Crawford. She decided to have security present. She is aware that CUPE, NSNU,

Unifor are three unions that showed up for the rally. There was some horn blowing. She

said that she was inside her office at Wynn Park and did not know what was going on.

[240] Ms. Peck testified that she was aware of the letter received under her door on February

17, 2021, signed by staff with their safety concerns about placing Plexiglas on the East

wing nurses’ station and questioned why they needed Plexiglas. Ms. Peck testified that

she was concerned for the residents’ home life environment and she thought that

Plexiglas would be too intrusive. She also did not think the fire Marshall would approve.

Ms. Peck had a meeting with staff, with Ms. Blois present, along with herself and Mr.

Crawford, to go over the letter. Ms. Blois was present in the area approximately 7-8 feet

away. Ms. Peck said that she told Mr. Crawford that she was against Plexiglas because of

the reasons mentioned. She said that Mr. Crawford was not receptive to her answers. She

said no other units had concerns, however the meeting was amicable.

[241] Ms. Peck testified that she asked Mr. Thody to obtain the video of Mr. Crawford’s shifts

from February 20, 2021, and February 21, 2021, to see what the safety concerns were

that had been raised in the staff letter from February 17, 2021, and the meeting with Mr.

Crawford. Wynn Park’s analysis of those videos at located at Exhibit R-13.

[242] Ms. Peck testified that she reviewed those videos and said that, in addition to Mr.

Crawford, there was only one CPA on at that time. Ms. Peck said that Mr. Crawford would

have only had an hour worth of paperwork to complete, so he should have been able to

help out. She referred to video analysis Exhibit R-13 and as a result of looking at the videos

she saw several safety issues that she was concerned with. These include things such as

leaving the Med Cart unattended, which, if it is not in use, should be locked in the Med

Room. The Med Cart has to be locked at all times. The cart being unattended was a major

concern for her as there are medications on the cart that could be taken by residents. She

said she noticed a CPA not getting any help from Mr. Crawford. There were incidental

instances during the night, such as diapers that had to be delivered to rooms, where he

did not appear to be helping out. In another instance, she noted that the Med Room door

was wide open and Mr. Crawford had left the unit unattended. This all occurred at the

nurses’ station on the East Unit. Ms. Peck testified that they were serious violations of his

duties.

[243] Ms. Peck testified about her review of the video located at Exhibit R-1, Tab 29, where she

observed the Med Cart being left unattended, and the Med Room door open. The Med

Cart was left unattended for 6 1/2 minutes. She said that, again, throughout the video it

showed the Med Room door being left open. At one time Mr. Crawford left the unit and

went into a meeting room. Sheila Crombie was the only CCA on duty that evening as they

were short staffed. Ms. Peck said that the video showed that Mr. Crawford left Med door

open and the cart unattended on number of occasions. Ms. Peck testified that there were

several infractions of safety policies of Wynn Park and found those infractions disturbing.

Ms. Peck said she called Ms. Blois to say that she had lost faith in Mr. Crawford and she

had to terminate him as he was untrustworthy for leaving the Med door unlocked and

Med Cart unattended on numerous occasions. As such, a termination letter to Mr.

Crawford was issued, dated February 26, 2021, Exhibit R-1, Tab 8.

[244] Ms. Peck testified that Mr. Crawford never, at any time, used the word ”union” or said

that if a union was present that there would be better benefits and working conditions.

She testified that before issuing the letter of termination she never heard Mr. Crawford

using the word ”union” at all. Ms. Peck said that she had a discussion with Ms. Nielsen on

March 5, 2021, as Ms. Nielsen had read the Rank and File article and heard about the

termination of Mr. Crawford. Ms. Peck wanted to inform Ms. Nielsen that the article was

not true and that Mr. Crawford had never mentioned the word ”union”. Ms. Peck testified

that Wynn Park is not an anti-union employer, and she never asked Ms. Nielsen for her

views on union support.

[245] As for Ms. Burns, Ms. Peck said that she never told Ms. Burns to vote one way or the

other. With respect to the meeting with Ms. Vaughan’s on March 16, 2021, Ms. Peck said

there was some talk that Ms. Vaughan was hiding in the adult room and that she was not

seen very much on the floors and that was the reason Ms. Peck wanted to speak with her.

Ms. Peck testified that she never asked Ms. Vaughan for her loyalty. When the application

for certification was filed by the Union, it did not matter to Ms. Peck as she would just let

the process work. She did not try to influence any of the staff on how to vote. Further,

Ms. Peck testified that she had no involvement with Ms. White in creating the Facebook

page for Wynn Park.

[246] Ms. Peck testified that she was always available to answer any questions the staff may

have about the vote process. There was no coercion or intimidation of the work process

or how they would vote. The process is a secret ballot and no one would know how they

voted. Ms. Peck said that she had good relations with staff. She encouraged all of them

to exercise their right to vote. Ms. Peck testified about the letters to staff, located at

Exhibit U-1 Tab 7, Tab 8, and Tab 11 and said that she never intimidated staff with respect

to their right to vote.

[247] On cross examination Ms. Peck said that the staff safety issues letter of February 17, 2021,

Exhibit U-39, was slipped to her under her door and Ms. McEwen also got a copy of the

letter.

[248] Ms. Peck testified, with respect to Exhibit R-1 Tabs 1 and 2, Ms. Blois did not ask Ms. Peck

for permission to record Ms. Burris’ telephone call. Ms. Peck testified that Ms. Blois was

very annoyed that an unfair labour practice complaint that was filed included comments

from Ms. Burris that were not true. Ms. Peck said that Ms. Blois told her that Ms. Burris

wanted them pulled from the file. Ms. Peck offered, if Ms. Burris wanted to put it in an

affidavit, for Wynn Park to pay for the expense for her lawyer to draft it. Ms. Burris did

not take up the offer.

[249] With respect to Ms. Burns believing that the suggestion box was a voting box to see which

way staff would vote, Ms. Peck testified that was not correct. It was strictly for the

purpose of suggestions from staff. Ms. Peck testified that the first time she heard of

whispering by supervisors in the hall was after the car rally. She denies telling Ms.

Vaughan that she should not be sitting on the fence about supporting the union. Ms. Peck

testified that she never said that RN’s could not belong to a union. Ms. Peck said that if

there was any talk, any reference by her of loyalty, it was loyalty to the residents of Wynn

Park and not in relation to union activities. She denies the comments attributed to her by

Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Vaughan.

[250] In respect to allegations that Ms. McEwen made a comment that a room may be bugged,

Ms. Peck testified that no room was ever bugged and that they would never authorize it.

Further, in regard to allegations by Ms. Nielsen that Ms. McEwen had told her that Ms.

McEwen did not support the firing of Mr. Crawford, Ms. Peck testified that was not true.

Ms. McEwen signed the letter and was in full agreement to terminate Mr. Crawford.

Union Argument

Unfair Labour Practices

Law

[251] The Union allege that the management discussed the Union inappropriately with

employees, in violation of sections 53(1)(3)(a) (i), (iii) (iv) (v (v) (vi), 53(3)(e) and Section

58 of the Act which states as follows:

53

(1)

….

No employer and no person acting on behalf of an employer shall

(3)

(a)

No employer and no person acting on behalf of an employer shall

refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person or

otherwise discriminate against any person in regard to employment or

any term or condition of employment, because the person

(i)

is or was a member of a trade union,

….

(iii)

has testified or otherwise participated or may testify or

otherwise participate in a proceeding under this Act,

has made or is about make a disclosure that he may be

required to make in proceeding under this Act,

has made an application or filed a complaint under this

Act,

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

has participated in a strike that is not prohibited by this

Act or exercised any right under this Act;

….

(e)

seek, by intimidation, threat of dismissal or any other kind of

threat, by the imposition of a pecuniary or other penalty or by any other

means, to compel a person to refrain from becoming or to cease to be a

member, officer or representative of a trade union or to refrain from

(i)

testifying or otherwise participating in a proceeding

under this Act,

ii)

making a disclosure that he may be required to make in

a proceeding under this Act,

(iii)

….

making an application or filing a complaint under this

Act;

58

(1)

No person shall seek by intimidation or coercion to compel a

person to become or refrain from becoming or to cease to be a member

of a trade union or an employers’ organization.

(2)

Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to deprive an employer of his

freedom to express his views so long as he does not use coercion,

intimidation, threats or undue influence.

Note: In the Union’s Post-Hearing Brief, on page 51, there is reference to clause

(2) as D. It is assumed this is a typo and the reference is Section 58(2) of the Act.

[252] The Union refers to the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 508 v. Zinck’s Bus Company

Limited 1994 17662 (NS LRB), quoting from it significantly. The key principle that

the Union relies from that case is that employers have to be sensitive to the inherently

unbalanced power dynamic between an employer and an employee, as the employee

relies on the employer for their job and income. The messages themselves, while they

may appear, or be made to appear, non-coercive, need to be reviewed within that context

to understand whether an employee who disagreed with the message would feel that

they were being disadvantaged because of their position. The Board also considered the

motive of the employer in expressing their opinion, noting in that case the employer was

anti-union thus tipping the scales in favour of protecting the union from interference. The

Union quotes one particular section (Union Post-Hearing Brief – Page 53, Paragraph 314):

…interrogation of employees…about membership in or attitude

towards a union, or about the membership or attitude of other

employees, is inherently destructive of significant rights of union and

employees under the Act and under the Charter. …infiltration of union

meetings by them or by other agents or representatives of the

employer as conduct that interferes even if the union and/or the

employees are unaware of it. Into this same category of inherently

destructive conduct that will be treated as “interference” we add also

cases of…disproportionate discipline.

[Emphasis added.]

[253] The Union argues that the burden to prove anti-union animus is light, relying on

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 625 and Taycar Electric 2018 NSLB

105 and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4919 v. Lunenburg Home for Special

Care (Harbour View Haven) 2009 NSLRB 8. It further noted that “Labour boards piece

together a pattern of circumstantial evidence” (Union Post-Hearing Brief – Page 55,

Paragraph 321) and refers to Commercial Logistics v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31. 2019

95335:

30

The crux of such an unfair labour practice case is the employer’s

motivation in the [discipline], something which rarely will be

disclosed by admissions. Employers don’t ordinarily advertise

their anti-union activities. Such intention must be pieced

together from a pattern of circumstantial evidence.

…

32…

whether their evidence was in “harmony with the

preponderance of the probabilities which a practical and

informed person would readily recognize as

reasonable in

that place and in those conditions” (Faryna v. Chorny, para. 11)

Evidence

[254] The Union identifies the key actions taken by Wynn Park that it considers “inherently

destructive conduct (Union Post-Hearing Brief - Page 53):

1.

Interrogation of employees about membership in or attitudes

toward a union, or about the membership or attitude of other

employees.

2.

While perhaps not overly “planned” infiltration of Union meeting

March 21, (which is questionable in light of Teresa McEwen’s

actions/words toward Shalene Rafuse or Jennifer Beaver that Sunday

morning, followed by the matching “questions” to Mr. Rao by Madison

Murphy that evening); that’s exactly what it turned out to be. Madison

Murphy and Rebecca MacKey(sic) involved management possibly that

same night, and certainly the next day. Too much coincidence.

3.

Disproportionate discipline of Mr. Peck.

Note: It is assumed by the Board that this is a typo and the reference is

intended to be Tevin Crawford.

[255] The Union argued that there is general agreement with the incidents surrounding Ms.

Burris and the filing of ULP 3. While Ms. Burris did not testify, Mr. Rao did and Ms. Blois

recorded her call with Ms. Burris and provided an audio recording of the call, Exhibit R-1,

Tabs 2 and 3.

[256] The Union argues Mr. Rao testified that after Ms. Burris was pulled into a meeting with

Mr. Thody on April 21, 2021, he spoke with her on April 22, 2021, and April 24, 2021.

Following the second call with Ms. Burris, Mr. Rao says he prepared ULP 3 based on the

information she provided and sent her a draft of the complaint for her review on April 26,

2021, the day following Ms. Burris’ resignation from Wynn Park. He confirmed that he did

not receive a response to his email but acknowledged that he spoke with her on April 27,

2021, wherein she requested that he retract the complaint and stated that what she had

read was untrue. Mr. Rao refused to retract ULP 3 and filed it with the Board.

[257] The Union argues Mr. Rao testified that while he knew he did not have Ms. Burris’ consent

to file ULP 3, he viewed it as being his complaint and therefore he did not believe he

required Ms. Burris’ consent.

[258] The Union refers to several alleged encounters, some more developed than others. The

key ones that the Union appears to be relying on include:

1.

February 24, 2021 – Mr. Crawford alleges that Ms. Peck

responds to his comment about unionization by reminding him

that Wynn Park is “non-unionized and would be staying that way”,

something that Ms. Peck denies. (Union Post-Hearing Brief – Page

10, Paragraph 47)

2.

February 25, 2021 – Ms. Nielsen states that Ms. Peck asks

her questions about whether she had heard any union talk going

on and asks her about specific employees and whether Ms. Nielsen

was aware if they were supporters of the Union or not. Ms. Nielsen

also testified that Ms. Peck told her not to tell anyone about the

conversation. Ms. Peck disputes the content of the conversation,

as outlined later in this decision.

3.

March 4, 2021 – It is alleged that Ms. McEwen entered the

lunchroom and advises Ms. MacKenzie and Cathy Blaikie that RNs

and LPNs cannot be in the union. Ms. McEwen denies stating it as

a fact.

4.

March 5, 2021 – Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. McEwen

advised her that management expects the support of supervisors

on the union issue. Tessa Burns (“Ms. Burns”) also states that Ms.

Peck advised her that a box would be put up for voting, something

that Ms. Peck denies saying.

5.

March 16, 2021 – Ms. Vaughan testified that Ms. Peck has

a discussion with her, asking her about loyalty and the need to

support management. It is alleged that Ms. Peck told Ms. Vaughan

to pretend that the conversation never happened. Ms. Peck denies

saying the things that Ms. Vaughan alleges her to have said.

6.

March 21, 2021 – The Union alleges that Ms. McEwen

spoke to Ms. Beaver, accusing her of harassing other employees

about the Union and told her to stop talking about the Union

during her breaks. It is also asserted that Ms. McEwen

reprimanded and intimidated Ms. Rafuse when she met with her.

7.

reprimanded, intimidated and threatened.

8. March 22, 2021 – Ms. Peck contacts Ms. MacKenzie at

March 21, 2021 – The Union alleges that Ms. Beaver was

home and allegedly questions her about whether she was at the

meeting the previous night. Ms. Peck claims she called to tell her

about the upcoming vote. Ms. McEwen also arranges to have the

lock cut off on a filing cabinet used by Ms. Rafuse, moving business

files as well as personal items to an unlocked filing cabinet.

9.

March 23, 2021 – Ms. Macumber testifies that Ms. Peck

approached her and tells her to attend at the vote because she

believed she knew what Ms. Macumber’s vote would be. Ms.

Macumber said she felt panicked by Ms. Peck’s questioning.

10.

April 7, 2021 – Ms. Beaver, Ms. Nielsen and Ms. Waldron

testified that they were verbally reprimanded by Ms. McEwen and

Denise MacKenzie. Ms. Nielsen says that the issues raised, while

legitimate, had not been raised before.

[259] The Union argues that the events referred to above are more than just coincidental with

the timing of the organizing drive, suggesting it is not a “logical conclusion” (Union Post-

Hearing Brief – Page 55, Paragraph 323). It refers to the following incidents or discussions,

suggesting they are not coincidences (Union Post-Hearing Brief – Page 56, Paragraph 324):

(1) After receiving the East Unit letter on February 17, Administrator

Sheila Peck only happened to go to East Unit a week later, on

February 24, to investigate the concerns after Mr. Crawford spoke to

co-workers about unionizing during his morning and noon break that

day.

(2) Sheila Peck’s questioning of Tevin Crawford and Elaine Nielsen

(which Ms. Peck denies) coincidentally occurred the next day, on

February 25. [According to what Ms.

Peck told Ms. Nielsen

on March 5, someone had phoned her at home the evening of

February 24 to inform her that Tevin was interesting (sic) in

unionizing, so it wasn’t a coincidence.] Peck’s follow-up conversation

with Elaine Nielsen March 5:

(3) Sheila Peck on February 25 decided to scrutinize video surveillance

recordings of only Tevin Crawford shifts – not others – and

coincidentally she discovered infractions which the Employer relied

upon (in its response to the unfair labour practice complaint, not in

the termination letter) to justify its termination.

(4) Sheila Boyle Peck just happened to make a FB friend request to Elaine

Nielsen on February 27.

(5) Madison Murphy just happened to raise with Govind Rao after the

Union meeting two points that Teresa McEwen had admonished

Shalene Rafuse and Jennifer Beaver about that day: 1. Employees

feeling harassed; and 2. No campaigning at work.

(6) Teresa McEwen just happened to be “not happy” on March 22, after

hearing from Madison Murphy about her complaint re the Union

meeting.

(7) Teresa McEwen just happened to need to move materials from

Shalene Rafuse’s filing cabinet on March 22, rather than wait for her

to be at work on Wednesday, when an audit wasn’t scheduled until

April.

Issue 2 - Shalene Rafuse Meeting/Filing Cabinet Lock Removal

[260] The Union refers to a number of incidents with respect to Ms. Rafuse and Ms. Beaver:



March 5, 2021 – Ms. Rafuse testified that Ms. McEwen advised

her that management expects the support of supervisors on the union

issue and also attempted to find out Ms. Rafuse’s position on the Union.



March 21, 2021 – It is asserted that Ms. McEwen reprimanded

and intimidated Ms. Rafuse when she met with her, based solely on an

accusation from Ms. White, which was based on things that Ms. White

heard from others. Ms. Rafuse testified that she had never heard from

people she had messaged that they did not wish to receive messages

about the Union.



March 21, 2021 – The Union alleges that Ms. McEwen spoke to

Ms. Beaver, accusing her of harassing other employees about the Union

and told her to stop talking about the Union during her breaks. It asserts

that the basis for Ms. McEwen speaking to Ms. Beaver was information

based to her by other people, which she did not investigate prior to

confronting Ms. Beaver.

Issue 3 – Elaine Nielsen, Jennifer Beaver and Beverley Waldron Meetings

[261] The Union raises the issue of Wynn Park’s decision not to call Denise MacKenzie, who was

involved in the meeting on April 7, 2021, with Ms. Nielsen, Ms. Beaver and Ms. Waldron

and appears to infer that meant that Ms. MacKenzie “got the message” (Union Post-

Hearing Brief – Page 65, Paragraph 386), although it is not clear what is meant by that.

The Union argued there is also reference to conversations, some which were clear

hearsay and others that appeared to have been assumed to have happened. The result of

this inference, as argued by the Union, is that the meeting on April 7 was a violation of

the Act. It is also suggested that the actions on April 7 were precipitated by the filing of

ULP 2 the previous day.

[262] With respect to the March 1 meeting with Ms. McEwen, the Union argues that the fact

that Ms. Nielsen was not shaken on cross-examination about what Ms. McEwen said

about her lack of a reason for firing Mr. Crawford is telling. Also, the Union argues the fact

that in response to a question from the Vice-Chair, Ms. Waldron confirmed that Ms.

McEwen had in fact said those things (Union Post-Hearing Brief – Page 72, Paragraph 431).

[263] The Union argues it is also noted that the first time that the allegations about what Ms.

McEwen said on March 1 were disputed was when Ms. McEwen testified. They were not

denied in either responses to any of the ULPs, in the pre-hearing submissions filed by

Wynn Park or was the point put to the Union witnesses during cross-examination. The

Union also challenges whether the notes that Ms. McEwen states she created about the

March 1 meeting were made contemporaneously, especially as they were only produced

on July 2, 2021, and not before.

Issue 4 – March 21, 2021 Union Meeting

[264] The Union argues on March 5, 2021, the Union organized a car rally to take place outside

of Wynn Park. In attendance were members of the Union, including Mr. Rao with a van

equipped with a PA system, and members from the NSNU and UNIFOR. Mr. Rao testified