Ontario Labour Relations Board
File No.: 3539-99-R Date: March 22, 2000
Between: Maria Wadden, Antonio Maria de Carvalho-Costa, Applicants v. Service Employees International Union, Local 204 AFL-CIO, CLC, Responding Party.
Before: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and R. R. Montague.
Decision of the Board
The applicant has applied to the Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”) for a declaration that the responding party no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit for which it is the bargaining agent.
As stated in a Board decision dated March 8 , 2000 regarding this matter at paragraph 2:
The parties agree that the collective agreement between the responding party and the employer Sanitary Maintenance Systems (SMS) commenced on May 1, 1997 and expired on December 31, 1999. However, the responding party (“the union”) submits that the application is untimely under section 67 of the Act because a conciliation officer was appointed by the Minister of Labour on December 2, 1999.
Section 67(2) of the Act states:
(2) Where notice has been given under section 59 and the Minister has appointed a conciliation officer or a mediator, no application for certification of a bargaining agent of any of the employees in the bargaining units as defined in the collective agreement and no application for a declaration that the trade union that was a party to the collective agreement no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit as defined in the agreement shall be made after the date when the agreement ceased to operate or the date when the Minister appointed a conciliation officer or a mediator, whichever is later, unless following the appointment of a conciliation officer or a mediator, if no collective agreement has been made,
(a) at least 12 months have elapsed from the date of the appointment of the conciliation officer or a mediator;
(b) a conciliation board or a mediator has been appointed and 30 days have elapsed after the report of the conciliation board or the mediator has been released by the Minister to the parties; or
(c) 30 days have elapsed after the Minister has informed the parties that he or she does not consider it desirable to appoint a conciliation board,
whichever is later.
In the decision dated March 8, 2000 the Board sought representations from the applicants stating their position as to whether or not the application for termination is timely.
Having considered the pleadings and the representations of the parties the Board finds that this application is untimely in accordance with the provisions of section 67(2) of the Act.
The application is therefore dismissed.
“Timothy W. Sargeant”
for the Board