Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183 v. Steel Technologies Framing Inc.
File No.: 3809-99-R Date: April 4, 2000
Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183, Applicant v. Steel Technologies Framing Inc., Responding Party v. Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Intervenor.
BEFORE: D. L. Gee, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. G. Knight and G. McMenemy.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1This is an application for certification in the construction industry in which the Board in its decision of March 27, 2000 asked for additional submissions with respect to a number of issues raised by the intervenor.
2Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (“Drywall Local 675”) filed an intervention on March 24, 2000. The intervention asserts the Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183 (“Local 183”) application should be dismissed on a number of bases including the problematic membership evidence filed by the applicant. The intervenor provided the Board with a copy of its collective agreement with the employer. This collective agreement expires April 30, 2000.
3The applicant, Local 183, accepts the validity of the collective agreement between the employer and Drywall Local 675. Local 183 submits that its application constitutes a timely displacement application and asks to amend its bargaining unit to mirror the description in Article 1 of the collective agreement.
4Based on the materials filed with the Board this appears to be a timely displacement application for certification. The applicant has advised the Board that the same employees are affected whether it is a displacement vote or a vote based on the original applied for bargaining unit. The Board is satisfied, notwithstanding any issues that may exist with respect to the membership evidence filed, that, based on all of the materials filed by the applicant, it appears that not less than 40 per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed were members of a union at the time the application was made. In the Board’s view, it is appropriate to treat this application as a displacement application and amend the bargaining unit description to mirror the recognition clause in the intervenor’s collective agreement. Article 1 – Recognition reads as follows:
The Employer recognizes the Union as the sole exclusive bargaining agent for all its onsite construction employees, including without limitation, all carpenters, carpenters’ apprentices, helpers, labourers, welders, construction mechanics and/or technicians, and any other trades persons performing construction work in the Residential sector in the construction industry in the Province of Ontario.
5The Board hereby directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all onsite construction employees, including without limitation, all carpenters, carpenters’ apprentices, helpers, labourers, welders, construction mechanics and/or technicians, and any other trades persons performing construction work in the Residential sector in the construction industry in the Province of Ontario.
6The vote will be held on April 6, 2000. Vote arrangements are set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Meeting".
7The responding party is directed to post copies of this decision next to the “Notice to Employees of Application for Certification”.
8All individuals who were employed by Steel Technologies Framing Inc. and at work in the voting constituency on March 20, 2000 are eligible to vote.
9Voters will be asked to indicate whether they wish to be represented by the applicant or by the intervenor in their employment relations with the responding party.
10Paragraph 2 of the Board’s first decision in this matter stated:
“The Board has not found the applicant to be a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) and 126 of the Act, and accordingly, any ballots ultimately cast in a representation vote will be sealed until such status has been established”.
11Any 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.
12This matter is referred to the Registrar.
“D. L. Gee”
for the Board