Ontario Labour Relations Board
[1985] OLRB Rep. September 1397
1253-85-R International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, (U.A.W.), Applicant, v. Noranda Metal Industries Limited, Respondent, v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 2345, Intervener
BEFORE: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chairman and Board Members P. Grasso and M. Fayrs.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; September 9, 1985
1This is an application for certification.
2The applicant has requested that a pre-hearing representation vote be taken.
3It appears to the Board on an examination of the records of the applicant and the records of the respondent that not less than thirty-five per cent of the employees of the respondent in the voting constituency hereinafter described were members of the applicant at the time the application was made.
4Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Board directs that a pre-hearing representation vote be taken of the employees of the respondent in the following voting constituency:
all employees of the respondent at its Fergus Division, Fergus, save and except foremen, persons above the rank of foreman, office and sales staff, students employed during the school vacation period or on a co-operative training program with the University.
5The intervener requested that the ballot box be sealed until the Board dealt with the allegations raised in its intervention where it stated:
'Organizers on behalf of the Applicant approached employees at the plant during working hours and told them that if they did not sign a card for the Applicant they would have to join the U.A.W. later and $25.00. [sic]"
6The Board in Electrohome Limited, Board File No. 1 l5O-85-R, decision dated August 26, 1985, dealt with a similar allegation made in a pre-hearing vote certification application at paragraph 6 where it stated:
"That intervention stated 'Organizers on behalf of the Applicant approached employees at the plant during working hours and told them that if they did not sign a card for the applicant they would have to join the U.A.W. later and pay $25.00'. Before the Board seals the ballot box in a pre-hearing vote, it must be satisfied that a party to the proceeding has made an allegation or taken a position which, if established, could affect the applicant's entitlement to have the pre-hearing vote take place. It is not apparent to the Board at this stage of the proceeding that the statement made by intervener #2 is of such a type."
7We are similarly not satisfied that the allegations made in this proceeding, if established, could affect the applicant's entitlement to have the pre-hearing vote take place. Therefore we decline to order the ballot box sealed. Should the intervener, or any other party wish to make representations as to whether the Board should seal the ballot box, such party must deliver to the Board and to the other parties in this matter its submissions not later than Friday, September 14, 1985.
8All employees of the respondent in the voting constituency on the 28th day of August, 1985, who have not voluntarily terminated their employment or who have not been discharged for cause between the 28th day of August, 1985, and the date the vote is taken will be eligible to vote.
9Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant or the intervener in their employment relations with the respondent.
10The matter is referred to the Registrar.