Edward Carson, Applicant v. Teamsters Local 880, Responding Party.
File No.: 3771-99-U Before: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair. Date: June 27, 2000
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1The responding party (“the union”) filed submissions pursuant to the Board’s May 9, 2000 decision. Those submissions deal with the issue of the Board’s jurisdiction to entertain this application alleging a violation of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). The union alleges that the Canada Inustrial Relations Board (“the CIRB”) is the entity that must deal with this matter, because the Canada Council of Teamsters (“the Council”), of which the union claims it is an affiliate, was certified in 1994 by the CLRB (the predecessor of the CIRB) for a province-wide bargaining unit of employees of the employer, Brinks Canada Limited (“Brinks”). The CLRB decision to certify the Council was subject to an application for judicial review which was ultimately dismissed by the Federal Court of Appeal.
2Although he was not required by the Board to do so, the applicant sent correspondence dated May 12, 2000, (received by the Board on May 18, 2000), in which he asserted that the union was previously certified by the Board to represent the employees of Brinks.
3The applicant may be correct that at some point the union was certified by this Board. However, a review of the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal (Brinks Canada Limited v. The Canada Council of Teamsters and the Canada Labour Relations Board, unreported, August 9, 1995) which the union attached to its submissions reveals that while Brinks had previously bargained with trade unions certified by various provincial labour boards, on January 28, 1992, the CLRB decided that Brinks’ services were within an area of federal jurisdiction, and that its labour relations fell under the jurisdiction of the Canada Labour Code (“the Code”). Accordingly, it certified the Council. Subsequently the CLRB amended the certificate to cover an “all-Ontario” bargaining unit, which gave rise to the filing of the aforementioned application for judicial review.
4The Federal Court of Appeal decision refers to prior provincially certified trade unions. Nevertheless, it would appear that, more recently, labour relations involving Brinks and the union are and have been federally regulated. Consequently, this Board has no jurisdiction to deal with the application.
5The application is dismissed.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the majority