[1989] OLRB Rep. May 405
0174-89-R Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, Applicant v. Blue Bell Canada Incorporated, Respondent v. Group of Employees, Intervener
BEFORE: Patricia Hughes, Vice-Chair, and Board Members R. W Pirrie and C. McDonald.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 16, 1989
1This is an application for certification.
2"Group of Employees" is added to the style of cause as "Intervener".
3Prior to the scheduled hearing in this matter, the parties met with a Labour Relations Officer and settled all matters in dispute among them. They further waived their right to a formal hearing before a panel of the Board.
4The applicant filed this application under the name "Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union AFL-CIO; CLC". By letter dated April 25, 1989, the Registrar informed the applicant that "the Board has not found in any previous proceeding that the applicant has been found to be a trade union within the meaning of section l(l)(p) of the Labour Relations Act under [that name]". The letter invites the applicant to inform the Board if that information is incorrect. The applicant requested that its name on the application be amended to "Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union", a name under which an organization had been found to be a trade union. The other parties consent to the amendment and agree that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of clause l(l)(p) of the Labour Relations Act ("the Act"). We are satisfied that the applicant has made a bona fide mistake and therefore, pursuant to section 104 of the Act, we hereby amend the application to reflect the applicant's name as "Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union" and the style of cause is correspondingly amended.
5The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of clause l(l)(p) of the Act.
6Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Board finds that
all employees of the respondent in the Town of Renfrew, save and except supervisors persons above the rank of supervisor, office, clerical and sales staff, truck drivers, mechanics, persons regularly employed for not more than 24 hours per week and students employed for the school vacation period,
constitute a unit of employees of the respondent appropriate for collective bargaining.
7The applicant filed sufficient applications for membership to warrant certification without a vote. There were also filed statements of desire in opposition to the union ("the petition"). The number of persons who signed both the petition and applications for membership was such that the Board would ordinarily inquire into whether the petition was a voluntary expression of those persons who signed it in order to determine whether to direct a vote, despite the level of membership support evidenced by the number of cards filed. The applicant does not challenge the voluntariness of the petition and has agreed to the taking of a vote, however.
8The Board is satisfied that not less than forty-five per cent of the employees of the respondent in the bargaining unit at the time the application was made were members of the applicant on May 3, 1989, the terminal date fixed for this application and the date which the Board determines, under clause 103(2)(j) of the Act, to be the time for ascertaining membership under subsection 7(1) of the Act.
9Therefore, the Board directs the taking of a representation vote in this application.
10All employees in the bargaining unit on May 11, 1989 who are also in the bargaining unit on the date the vote is taken will be eligible to vote.
11Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the respondent.
12This matter is referred to the Registrar.