Citation and case details
What happened
After certification, VLG asked the Board to reconsider the earlier ruling. This second decision examines whether there was a reviewable error in how certification was handled for Vane Lawn & Garden Services (1981) Ltd. (also known as Vane Lawn and Garden, Vane Lawn & Garden, VLG).
The reconsideration panel reviewed the grounds raised, the original record, and the governing reconsideration standard. It found no basis to disturb the core certification result.
Evidence highlights
Reconsideration request targeted the first ruling
VLG sought leave to reconsider the certification decision, arguing the earlier panel misapplied build-up analysis, mishandled operations-manager status, and proceeded unfairly without an oral hearing. Those arguments formed the full scope of what the reconsideration panel had to test.
2025 BCLRB 213 · Section: Grounds advanced for reconsideration
Why this matters: This sets out exactly what the reconsideration panel was asked to re-evaluate.
Panel reviewed both record and legal standard
The panel assessed the original reasons, party submissions, and the established reconsideration framework before deciding whether any reviewable error justified reopening the certification outcome. It did not simply revisit the merits from scratch, but applied the proper reconsideration threshold.
2025 BCLRB 213 · Section: Reconsideration test and approach
Why this matters: It shows the ruling was not a quick affirmance; the panel applied a defined legal threshold.
No reviewable error found on key arguments
The panel found no basis to conclude the original decision was inconsistent with Code principles on the evidence before it. It also found no reversible procedural unfairness in the process chosen by the original panel when it proceeded without an oral hearing.
2025 BCLRB 213 · Section: Analysis of alleged errors
Why this matters: This closes VLG's main challenge and keeps the original certification analysis intact.
Result: reconsideration dismissed
The reconsideration application was dismissed, and the certification outcome remained in effect. The decision still recognized that section 139 remained available for unresolved role-status matters, preserving a separate procedural path without undoing the certification result.
2025 BCLRB 213 · Disposition section
Why this matters: This confirms the certification result stayed in place after the second decision.
What this means
This ruling confirms that the challenge to certification did not succeed. The earlier certification decision remained in effect after reconsideration review.
For workers and job seekers, the key point is continuity: the legal status established in the first ruling was not overturned here.
Official sources
- BCLRB Decisions database (search citation 2025 BCLRB 213 or case no. 2025-000376)
- CanLII decision: Vane Lawn & Garden Services (1981) Ltd., 2025 BCLRB 213 (CanLII), retrieved on 2026-02-06 (Source: Labour Relations Board; Date: 2025-11-04; File number: 2025-000376)
- Hosted PDF copy of this decision
- Certification overview page