The federal labour board has found low turnout and irregularities of “significant concern” with the strike vote that led more than 100,000 public servants to walk off the job this week.
The board found in a decision posted Thursday that the Public Service Alliance of Canada failed to properly let members know it had shortened the voting period by eight days, moving the deadline from April 19 to April 11.
Only about 35 percent of members of the bargaining unit, or 38,207 people, actually cast a ballot — and 80 percent of them were in favour of a strike mandate.
Members of the union received notice of a strike vote via email on Jan. 23, and voting began on Feb. 22.
But the decision shows the union did not have the correct email addresses of 15,000 members. Those people received a letter in the mail, instead, which was sent before the union moved up the April deadline.
Union president Chris Aylward had not previously revealed how many members were in favour of the strike mandate, except to say that it was an “overwhelming majority.”
The labour board decision arose from a complaint by a public servant who asked the board to overturn the result of the vote after he was unable to cast his ballot.
The board decided against granting that request, finding it was unlikely there would have been a different result even if the union had been more forthcoming with its members.
“The support for the strike was high enough that even if there were no irregularities, it is very likely that the outcome would still have been favour of a strike,” the decision said.
“The irregularities are of significant concern, and with different numbers, they could have resulted in the invalidation of the strike vote.”
In particular, the board said that reducing the voting time by eight days without adequately notifying members of the change was a “significant” issue, and the union fell short of its legislatively mandated responsibilities.
The board ruled that the union was allowed to change the date of the vote. However, it expressed “great concern” that the union did not make a “discernible effort” to announce the date change.
The union did mention the new date on social media and in e-news updates, but the board found that those notices didn’t adequately draw readers’ attention to the deadline.
“Bargaining unit members might have wanted to wait until the end of the voting period before casting their vote, so as to have the most current information when making their decision.”
