A. Chris Edwards v. The National Union of Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers of Canada: Local 1530 Belleville, Ontario, 2000 CanLII 2721

A. Chris Edwards v. The National Union of Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers of Canada: Local 1530 Belleville, Ontario

Parties

3266-99-R A. Chris Edwards, Applicant v. The National Union of Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers of Canada: Local 1530 Belleville, Ontario, Responding Party v. Northern Telecom Canada Limited, Intervenor.

BEFORE: Russell Goodfellow, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and R. R. Montague.

Decision of Russell Goodfellow, Vice-Chair and Board Member J. A. Ronson; February 10, 2000

1. The applicant has applied to the Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit for which it is the bargaining agent.

2. In its response, the union has asked that the application be dismissed without a vote on the following grounds: there are a number of errors in the name of the trade union shown as the responding party, including the reference to "Local 1530" rather than the allegedly correct No. "1520"; the possible inclusion of as many as 12 cooperative students among the individuals who "appear to have expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union" for the purposes of determining the appearance of 40 percent; the fact that the applicant indicated, in the certificate of delivery, that the application had been delivered to a representative of the company whom the responding party believes was not at work on the day in question and that it was actually delivered to another company representative. The Board is not persuaded that any of these matters should result in the dismissal of the application or the sealing of the ballot box. (Further, and in any event, it appears that the possible inclusion of the cooperative students would not have brought the appearance below the level of 40 percent.)

3. In further correspondence with the Board, however, the responding party take the position that the bargaining unit also includes as many as 200 members of Local 1535. (It may also now concede that "Local 1530"holds at least some of the bargaining rights.) On that basis, the responding party asks that a vote not be directed. However, the material included with this correspondence simply indicates that "the Company recognizes the Union as the exclusive bargaining agent … for all employees of the Company included in the bargaining units described in Appendix "A" annexed to this Agreement." There is nothing annexed to the correspondence. Accordingly, the Board is not persuaded on the basis of the material before it that it should do other than as indicated in paragraph 2.

4. This application was filed on February 7, 2000. The employees who are affected by this application are covered by a collective agreement between the responding party and Northern Telecom Canada Limited, with an effective date of February 26, 1997, until February 25, 2000. The bargaining unit description in that collective agreement is as follows:

all technical, office and clerical employees of Northern Telecom Canada Limited, at its manufacturing division in the County of Hasting, Ontario, save and except section managers, persons above the rank of section manager, engineers, members of the personnel department, nurses, secretaries reporting to the cabinet director level and above, and those listed in the letter of agreement.

Having regard to the provisions of section 63(2) of the Act, the Board finds that this application is timely.

5. It appears to the Board on an examination of the evidence before it, that not less than forty per cent of the employees in the bargaining unit had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union at the time the application was filed.

6. The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the employees of Northern Telecom Canada Limited employed in the bargaining unit described in paragraph 2 above. All those employed in that bargaining unit on February 7, 2000, the application filing date, will be eligible to vote.

7. The vote will be held on February 16, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached Notice of Vote and of Hearing.

8. Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the responding party in their employment relations with Northern Telecom Canada Limited.

9. The employer is directed to post copies of this decision and of the "Notice of Vote and of Hearing" adjacent to all copies of the "Notice to Employees of Application for Termination of Bargaining Rights" posted previously. These copies must remain posted for 30 days.

10. Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for termination of bargaining rights, other than status disputes, must file a detailed statement of representations with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received by the Board 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. 5: Status Disputes in Termination Applications (Non-Construction).

11. The matter is referred to the Registrar.

"Russell Goodfellow"

for the majority

Decision of Board Member R. R. Montague; February 10, 2000

Based on the flaws contained in the application, I would have dismissed the application.

"R. R. Montague"