[1990] OLRB Rep. January 102
1887-89-R Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1587, Applicant v. The Corporation of the Town of Vaughan, and Tokmakjian Limited, Respondents v. Group of Employees, Objectors
BEFORE: K. G. O'Neil, Vice-Chair, and Board Members R. M. Sloan and B. L. Armstrong.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; January 29, 1990
This is the continuation of an application for certification. In the Board's decision of December 4,1989 directing a representation vote, it noted its oral ruling that the applicant was a trade union and said that its reasons for that portion of the decision would issue at a later date. We now provide those reasons.
The applicant called evidence in support of its claim to be a trade union. Simon Alexander Clarke, an employee of GO-Transit (also known as the Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority) for the last eight years and Executive Vice-President of Local 1587 ("the Local") for the last five years, gave evidence identifying the constitution and general laws of the Amalgamated Transit Union ("A.T.U."), the international union of which the applicant is a local, as well as the collective agreement with GO-Transit to which this local is a party. Mr. Clarke was elected under the authority of the constitution pursuant to which elections take place every three years.
As Executive Vice-President, Mr. Clarke's duties include acting as Grievance Officer, member of the Negotiating Committee, and member of the union management committee. He is involved in representing grievors before the Ontario Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board and has represented Local 1587 in that capacity. Mr. Clarke was unable to testify as to the initial formation of the local but knew that the members had come from a T.T.C. bargaining unit.
The local, of whom there are approximately seven hundred members is a sufficiently established organization to have a full-time President and Business Agent, a Secretary Treasurer who will be full-time in July, 1990 and a Vice-President who holds a part-time position. It obtained bargaining rights for GO-Transit employees in 1981 and has remained in existence since that time, continuing to represent that bargaining unit for GO-Transit employees.
Counsel for the applicant cited Ontario Hydro, [1989] OLRB Rep. Feb. 185-at paragraph 44 for the proposition that it was less critical to focus on the original formation of an organization claiming to be a trade union where it has been in existence for a considerable period of time.
The applicant also relies on a decision of the Ontario Public Service Labour Relations Tribunal dated March 9, 1981 granting it status as an employee organization in a successful application for certification for a bargaining unit for employees of the Crown in Right of Ontario (Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority). The relevant definition in the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, under which that finding was made, is as follows:
Section 1(1)
(g) "employee organization" means an organization of employees formed for the purpose of regulating relations between the employer and employees under this Act, but does not include such an organization of employees that,
(i) receives from any of its members who are employees any money for activities carried on by or on behalf of any political party,
(ii) handles or pays in its own name on behalf of members who are employees any money for activities carried on by or on behalf of any political party,
(iii) requires as a condition of membership therein the payment by any of its members who are employees of any money for activities carried on by or on behalf of any political party,
(iv) supports or requires its members who are employees otherwise to support any political party, or
(v) discriminates against any employee because of age, sex, race, national on-gin, colour or religion;
- The corresponding definition in the Labour Relations Act, section l(l)(p) is as follows:
"trade union" means an organization of employees formed for purposes that include the regulation of relations between employees and employers and includes a provincial, national, or international trade union, a certified council of trade unions and a designated or certified employee bargaining agency.
Employer counsel argued that the applicant should not be allowed to extend the principles in Ontario Hydro, supra, to this extent. He argued that the applicant had not proven status.
The Board is persuaded that the applicant is a trade union under the Act. This is a question of fact in each case that arises. We agree with Ontario Hydro, supra, that the Board cannot impose requirements beyond the reasonable meaning of the provisions of the Act in making such a finding. We are of the view that the applicant fits within a reasonable reading of section l(l)(p). This local has become a bargaining agent for Crown employees under a statutory definition similar to the one in section l(l)(p) of our Act. In that capacity it has negotiated collective agreements, represented individuals before the Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board and has continued to maintain its status under the Constitution and By-laws filed. The Board notes the decision of this Board in File 1868-89-R in which Local 616 of the same union was recently granted status as a trade union.
As a chartered local of the A.T.U., it is an organization formed for purposes that include the regulation of relations between employees and employers. The objects set out in the A.T.U. constitution demonstrate this. For example, section 3 provides, in part, as follows:
The objects of this International Union shall be to organize Local Unions.
To place our occupation upon a higher plane of intelligence, efficiency and skill; ... to encourage the settlement of all disputes between employees and employers by arbitration; to secure employment and adequate pay for our work, including vacations with pay and old age pensions; to reduce the hours of labor and by all legal and proper means to elevate our moral, intellectual and social conditions.
To seek the improvement of social and economic conditions in the United States and Canada and to promote the interests of labor everywhere.
That we hold it as a sacred principle, that trade union members above all others should set a good example as good and faithful workers, performing their duties to their employers with honor to themselves and to their organization.
[emphasis in the original]
and section 13 provides as follows:
SEC. 13 LOCAL UNIONS: 13.1 How Formed. A.L.U. [Local Union] may be formed by ten (10) or more employees who are eligible for membership in the A.T.U. and who must apply to the I.P. [International President] and send $25.00 for a charter fee, outfit and seal, which will be forwarded, providing the applicants are qualified according to this Constitution.
The L.U. bylaws shall provide for the handling of all grievances and complaints of the membership and for the taking up of disputes arising between the membership and the company.
Article 4 of the Local By-Laws provides that the ATU Constitution shall govern in case of any conflict with the By-Laws. The evidence of Mr. Clarke of his functions under the Local Constitution and By-Laws persuades us that the applicant is currently functioning as a trade union and has been for several years.
We turn now to the outcome of the representation vote. No statement of desire to make representations has been filed with the Board within the time fixed under subsection 1 of section 70 of the Board's Rules of Procedure following the taking of the representation vote pursuant to the Board's direction of December 4, 1989, in this matter.
On the taking of the representation vote directed by the Board not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast were cast in favour of the applicant.
The application is therefore dismissed.
The Board will not entertain an application for certification by the applicant with respect to any of the employees of the respondent in the bargaining unit within the period of six months from the date hereof.
The Registrar will destroy the ballots cast in the representation vote taken in this matter following the expiration of 30 days from the date of this decision unless a statement requesting that the ballots should not be destroyed is received by the Board from one of the parties before the expiration of such 30-day period.