Frangos v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, 2000 CanLII 13137

0865-99-U Robert Frangos and Sergio Noblione, Applicants v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, CLC, AFL-C10, Soft Drink Workers Joint Local Executive Council, and United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 393W, Responding Parties v. Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd., Intervenor.

BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice-Chair.

APPEARANCES: Robert Frangos and Sergio Noblione appearing on behalf of themselves; John R. Evan, Brian Noonan and Doug Clemmensen for UFCW International; Tony DeBartolomeo, Carlos Garcia and Frank Stirpe for the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 393W; Martin Addario and Leslee Wills for the Intervenor.

DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 17, 2000

1This is an application brought pursuant to section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the "Act") that the responding parties had breached sections 70, 71, 72, 73,74, 75, 77, 79 and 87 of the Act.

2By a Board decision dated July 19, 1999, the Board found there was no prima facie case set out in respect of sections 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 77, 79 and 87 and dismissed the application as it related to these sections.

3By decision dated August 31, 1999 the Board allowed an amendment to provide that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 343 be added as a responding party.

4By decision dated November 10, 1999 the application as against the CAW-Canada was dismissed.

5In the decision dated November 10, 1999 at paragraph 4 the Board stated:

There is a prima facie case pleased as against the UFCW Local 393W. (I note that there may remain some confusion as to precisely which entity holds the bargaining rights at the Downsview location in question. It appears to be the UFCW, Local 393W. However the applicants have also named the sister international union and the Soft Drink Workers Joint Local Executive Council. This is a matter that will be dealt with in due course. However for ease of reference at the moment a reference to the UFCW Local 393W will include a reference to the International and the Soft Drink Council as responding parties).

6In a letter written to the Board dated March 14, 2000 the applicant requests “the Board to accept our decision to have both the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and the Soft Drink Joint Local Executive Council removed from the case as they are not involved”.

7At the hearing counsel for the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (the “International”) did not contest that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 393W (“Local 393W”) held the bargaining rights at the Downsview location in question.

8In these circumstances and having considered the submissions and pleadings of the parties the Board rules that the application is dismissed as against the International and the Soft Drink Joint Executive Council.

9In relation to the application as against Local 393W, Local 393W admits in its response that it has breached section 74 in its treatment of the applicants.

10Counsel for the International sought intervenor status and wished to present evidence relating to the original decision of Local 393W not to pursue the grievances of the applicants. Since that original refusal the executive of Local 393W has changed. The two applicants are currently on such executive.

11The Board however given the admission of Local 393W in its response that it had breached section 74 of the Act felt that such admission ended the matter. The Board therefore declined to hear any further evidence.

12The applicants sought as remedy that the Board order that the grievance dated March 26, 1998 by Robert Frangos and the grievance dated March 26, 1998 by Sergio Noblione (both grieving a one day suspension), be ordered to be reopened at the third step of the grievance procedure.

13Counsel for the employer made no submissions during the course of the proceedings.

14Given the admission of Local 343W, the Board finds that Local 343W has breached section 74 of the Act. As a remedy the Board orders that the employer and Local 343W proceed to step 3 of the grievance procedure as set out in the collective agreement in respect of the grievances set out in paragraph 12 above.

“Timothy W. Sargeant”

for the Board