2992-99-R Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local No. 880, Applicant v. First Choice Haircuts, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Russell Goodfellow, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and
D. A. Patterson.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; January 14, 2000
[1]. This is an application for certification.
[2]. The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
[3]. It appears to the Board on an examination of only the information provided in the application and the information and membership evidence filed by the applicant (see section 8(3) of the Act), that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed in the application for certification were members of the union at the time the application was made.
[4]. The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of First Choice Haircutters in the City of Windsor save and except Managers and persons above the rank of Manager.
[5]. The vote will be held on January 18, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
[6]. All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on January 10, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on January 10, 2000, the certification application filing date, include employees who were not at work on that date, so long as there is a reasonable expectation of their return to employment.
[7]. There appears to be a dispute between the parties as to whether the bargaining unit should be restricted to the following municipal address: 3224 Dougall Avenue; and as to whether the persons included in the bargaining unit should be restricted to “licensed hairstylists”. Any employees who may be affected by these apparent disputes shall be entitled to vote but their ballots shall be segregated and not counted until the Board orders or the parties otherwise agree. The responding party has given notice under section 8.1. However, it has agreed to a counting of the ballots. Accordingly, the ballot box will not be sealed on that basis. The responding party has also asserted that the applicant’s proposed bargaining unit could not be appropriate for collective bargaining. The Board finds that it could be appropriate. Finally, any issue as to the correct name of the responding party can be addressed at a later date.
[8]. Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
[9]. The responding party is directed to post copies of this decision and of the "Notice of Vote and of Hearing" adjacent to each of the posted copies of the "Notice to Employees of Application for Certification". 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 certification, other than status disputes, including any matters relating to the representation vote, 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. 4: Status Disputes in Certification Applications (Non-Construction).
[11]. The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Russell Goodfellow”
for the Board