0700-00-R Allied Construction Employees Local 1030, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Applicant v. Trexcon Construction (1997) Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Intervenor #1 v. Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183, Intervenor #2.
BEFORE: Inge M. Stamp, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. G. Knight and G. McMenemy.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; June 7, 2000
This is an application for certification filed under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the "Act").
The applicant has not established in a previous Board proceeding that it is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) or 126 of the Act. That issue is before the Board in another proceeding in Board File No. 0375-00-R.
Intervenor #1, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, asserts it is the bargaining agent and represents employees who are the subject of this application for certification. Intervenor #1 submits there is a collective agreement that covers all construction employees of the responding party in the Province of Ontario which expires in June 30, 2002. Intervenor #1 relies on a decision of the Board dated October 19, 1999 reflecting minutes of settlement in a section 69/1(4) application in Board File No. 0959-99-R. It is not clear from the intervention filed what position the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America takes with respect to this application. This intervenor appears to agree with the vote arrangements.
Intervenor #2, the Universal Workers Union, LIUNA Local 183, claims it represents the employees who are the subject of this application for certification. Further Intervenor #2 states it has applied to be certified as the bargaining agent for these employees. This intervenor takes the position that this application for certification should be dismissed for the reasons set out in schedule “A” of its intervention. In the alternative no vote should be held until all outstanding issues, including the unfair labour practice complaints in LIUNA Local 183’s application have been dealt with. Hearings have been scheduled in the Labourer’s application in Board File No. 3237-99-R for June 22 and 23, 2000.
Intervenor #2 raises issues with respect to the applicant’s bargaining rights, the applicant’s status as a trade union, the appropriateness of the bargaining unit and whether or not the applicant meets the 40% membership threshhold. This intervenor disagrees with the applicant’s bargaining unit description and submits that “no bargaining unit is appropriate at this time for the reasons set out in schedule “A” of its intervention.
The responding party, although duly served with the application material on June 1, 2000, according to the certificate of delivery filed by the applicant, failed to file its response with the Board within the time stipulated by Rule 135 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.
It appears to the Board on an examination of only the information provided in the application and the information and membership evidence filed by the applicant (see section 8(3) of the Act), that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed in the application for certification were members of the union at the time the application was made.
The Board further finds that this application does not relate to the industrial, commercial and institutional sector of the construction industry referred to in section 126 of the Act.
The Board further finds that all carpenters and carpenters’ apprentices and construction labourers in the employ of the responding party in all sectors of the construction industry in the City of Toronto, the Regional Municipalities of Peel and York, the Towns of Oakville and Halton Hills and that portion of the Town of Milton within the geographic Townships of Esquesing and Trafalgar, and the Towns of Ajax and Pickering in the Regional Municipality of Durham, excluding the industrial, commercial and institutional sector, save and except non-working foremen and persons above the rank of non-working foreman, constitute a unit of employees of the responding party appropriate for collective bargaining.
Having regard to the Board's finding as to the appropriate bargaining unit, the Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all carpenters and carpenters’ apprentices and construction labourers in the employ of Trexcon Construction (1997) Limited in all sectors of the construction industry in the City of Toronto, the Regional Municipalities of Peel and York, the Towns of Oakville and Halton Hills and that portion of the Town of Milton within the geographic Townships of Esquesing and Trafalgar, and the Towns of Ajax and Pickering in the Regional Municipality of Durham, excluding the industrial, commercial and institutional sector, save and except non-working foremen and persons above the rank of non-working foreman.
The vote will be held on June 9, 2000. Vote arrangements are set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Meeting".
Having regard to the issues raised in this application the Board directs that all ballots be segregated and the ballot box sealed until the Board directs otherwise or the parties agree to count the ballots.
The responding party is directed to post copies of the application for certification, the “Notice to Employees of Application for Certification”, this decision and the "Notice of Vote and of Meeting" in a location or locations where they are most likely to come to the attention of those individuals who are eligible to vote. These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
All individuals who were employed by Trexcon Construction (1997) Limited and at work in the voting constituency on June 1, 2000 are eligible to vote.
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.
Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue relating to the application for certification which remains in dispute, other than status disputes, must file a detailed statement of representations and all material facts upon which they rely with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received 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. 9: Status Disputes in Certification Applications in the Construction Industry.
This matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Inge M. Stamp”
for the Board```