II 2 The Union's application alleges that the arbitration award in Martelli's case was "inconsistent with the principles expressed or implied" in the Code, thus providing a legal basis for Board review of the award under Section 108 (1) (b) of the Code. In order to appreciate the thrust of that argu- ment, it will be helpful to review the factual circumstances which led to the arbitration, as disclosed in the award itself. At the time of Martelli's discharge in September 1975, the Employer was one of only two poultry-processing companies in the Lower Mainland area, each of which was owned ei- ther wholly or partially by the provincial government. On August 20, 1975, the Vancouver Province reported that a wrangle between these two companies and B.C. turkey processors had led to a sub- stantial backlog of laying fowl and turkeys on Lower Mainland farms awaiting slaughter by the pro- cessing companies. The report stated that "the processors could handle the extra birds but neither the union involved nor the processors want to have extra shifts, or pay the overtime involved." In the same story, the Chairman of the B.C. Turkey Marketing Board was quoted as saying, "It is obvi ous that something is wrong in the present setup. Abbotsford closed early this year. It is now my opinion that the Lower Mainland needs another independent processing plant