Ontario Labour Relations Board
Canadian Union of Operating Engineers and General Workers (CUOE), Applicant v. William Neilson Limited, Responding Party v. Milk and Bread Drivers, Dairy Employees, Caterers and Allied Employees, Local Union No. 647, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Russell Goodfellow, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and R. R. Montague.
DECISION OF RUSSELL GOODFELLOW, VICE-CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER R. R. MONTAGUE; September 18, 2000
1This is a displacement application for certification.
2The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”).
3The employees are currently represented by the intervenor.
4It appears to the Board on an examination of the evidence before it that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed in the application for certification were members of the applicant at the time the application was made.
5The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees at the Halton Hills milk pasteurizing plant and the London Depot save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, office staff, and persons covered by subsisting collective agreements.
6The vote will be held on September 20, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
7All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on September 13, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on September 13, 2000, 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.
8Voters will be asked to indicate whether they wish to be represented by the applicant or the intervenor in their employment relations with the responding party.
9This is a displacement application. The intervenor has filed a collective agreement which does not include a reference to the “London Depot”. Until the appropriate bargaining unit description is resolved, employees affected by this possible difference in the bargaining unit description shall be entitled to vote but their ballots shall be segregated and not counted until the Board orders or the parties agree. The responding party has given notice under section 8.1 of the Act. However, that notice would not appear to be numerically relevant. Accordingly, the ballot box will not be sealed on that basis. The intervenor has identified a number of matters on paragraph 3 of its intervention. Those matters can be dealt with, as necessary, following the vote.
10The 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.
11Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, 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. Representations with respect to any status dispute must be made in accordance with the directions provided in Information Bulletin No. 4: Status Disputes in Certification Applications (Non-Construction).
12The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Russell Goodfellow”
for the majority
DECISION OF BOARD MEMBER J. A. RONSON; September 18, 2000
The employer has pleaded that section 8.1 applies. As a result, there should be no vote until the issues are dealt with at a hearing. If a vote is ordered, then at the least, the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues are resolved.
“J. A. Ronson”