2560-99-R International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 353, Applicant v. 1206468 Ontario Ltd. c.o.b. as Quadracon, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Gail Misra, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. G. Knight and A. Haward.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; January 19, 2000
1This is an application for certification in which 39 of the ballots cast have been segregated and are the subject of challenges by either the applicant (the “union”) or the responding party (“Quadracon” or the “employer”).
2At the Regional Certification Meeting, held to attempt to resolve the matters in dispute, the employer apparently refused to disclose its records about the challenged employees. As a consequence neither party has made the required submissions regarding the individuals in dispute.
3By a letter dated December 23, 1999, counsel for the union has requested that the employer be required to disclose to the applicant the records concerning the challenged employees. Counsel for the employer was copied with this letter but has made no submission of its own.
4The proper working of the Board’s certification process is premised on a certain level of disclosure between the parties to ensure that these applications are dealt with as expeditiously as possible so that employers, employees and unions will know the outcome of an application for certification. The Regional Certification Meeting is held by a Labour Relations Officer soon after the voting has taken place so that all outstanding issues can be addressed by the parties. The meeting is an attempt to assist the parties through mediation efforts to resolve those issues which can be agreed upon, and to assist the parties to narrow issues and get some more information before remaining issues have to be dealt with at a hearing.
5Where there are challenges to the voters’ list, the Board expects that after the Regional Certification Meeting has been held, it will receive each party’s written submission regarding each of the challenges. This expectation is premised in part on the view that there will be an exchange of information about the challenges at the meeting so that each side can make informed submissions.
6In this case there was no discussion about the challenges because the employer would not disclose any information. This has caused delay in the process and an untenable situation. The Board has already received the union’s preliminary position regarding the challenged individuals but has received little else.
7In these circumstances the Board is of the view that the applicant’s request for disclosure should be granted. The Board orders the responding party to disclose to the applicant the following records with respect to the challenged employees:
a) any payroll, job site and work records which indicate whether the challenged employees were at work on the date of application, what work they were performing that day, and where they were performing work on that date;
b) any records and copies of licenses or contracts of apprenticeship which indicate whether the challenged employees held licenses or are registered apprentices; and,
c) any invoicing or billing records which indicate the payment arrangements between the responding party and the challenged individuals.
8Such disclosure is to be made at another Regional Certification Meeting to be held at a date to be set. Any documents which are disclosed in compliance with this Board order are not to be used for purposes unrelated to this proceeding. This matter is referred to the Manager of Field Services so that a Regional Certification Meeting can be convened as soon as possible
9This panel is not seized.
“Gail Misra”
for the Board