Ontario Labour Relations Board
[1998] OLRB REP. SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 844
2197-98-R Teamsters Local Union No. 879, Applicant v. Medcos Courier Canada Ltd., Responding Party
BEFORE: Bram Herlich, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J.A. Rundle and R. R. Montague.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; September 29, 1998
This is an application for certification.
The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The responding party employer has indicated its disagreement with the trade union's estimate, included in the application for certification, of the number of individuals in the bargaining unit pursuant to section 8.1(1) of the Act, and accordingly does not agree that the ballots cast in the representation vote be counted. In addition, the respondent contends that the bargaining unit description proposed by the applicant is not one which could be appropriate for collective bargaining.
In the circumstances and having reviewed the material filed and the submissions of the parties, it appears to the Board on an examination of the material before it, that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed by either party were members of the union at the time the application was made. Having made that determination, the Board will not order the sealing of the ballot box in this case. The issue regarding the appropriateness of the bargaining unit, if necessary, may be pursued at a hearing subsequent to the representation vote.
The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of Medcos Courier Canada Ltd. in the Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Went-worth, save and except supervisors, those above the rank of supervisor.
The vote will be held on October 1, 1998. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on September 24, 1998, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on September 24, 1998, the certification application filing date, include employees who were not at work on that date, so long as there is a reasonable expectation of their return to employment.
There is a dispute between the parties regarding the geographic scope of the unit. In addition, there may be a dispute as to whether or not office and sales staff ought to be included in the union. Should any individual whose eligibility to vote is challenged by either party seek to cast a ballot, such person will be permitted to mark a ballot. Any such challenged ballot, however, will be segregated and not counted except on agreement of the parties or by order of the Board.
Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
The responding party is directed to post copies of this decision and of the "Notice of Vote and of Hearing" adjacent to each of the posted copies of the "Notice to Employees of Application for Certification". These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, including any matters relating to the representation vote, must file a detailed statement of representations with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received by the Board within five days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays on which the Board is closed) of the date on which the vote is taken.
The matter is referred to the Registrar.