3855-99-R Teamsters Local Union No. 879, Applicant v. Crystal Springs Inc., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and D. A. Patteson.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 28, 2000
1This is an application for certification.
2The responding party (“the company”) disputes the trade union status of the applicant. However, the Board’s records indicate that the Board previously found the applicant to be a trade union within the meaning of subsection 1 of section 1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (“the Act”) in Board File 1272-88-R. This issue of trade union status may be raised at the hearing in this matter, if necessary.
3It 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.
4The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all dependent contractors of Crystal Springs Inc. working in and out of the City of Mississauga, save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, office and clerical staff and employees covered by a subsisting collective agreement.
5The vote will be held on March 30, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
6All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on March 23, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on March 23, 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.
7There is a dispute between the parties as to whether or not the bargaining unit should contain all dependent contractors of the company, or only those dependent contractors performing agent distribution and service contracting for the company. There also may be a dispute between the parties concerning the geographic scope of the bargaining unit. The company and the applicant may challenge voters based on these disputes at the representation vote, and ultimately have the issues determined at the hearing in this matter. Any ballot cast by a challenged voter shall be segregated and not counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree.
8Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the company.
9The company raises a further issue concerning this application. The company states that the application is being brought by the applicant for the purpose of avoiding a bar imposed as a result of an unsuccessful application that was previously brought by another local of the Teamsters for the same employees sought to be represented by the applicant in this case. The company states that, on that basis, the application should be dismissed without a vote. Again, this is an issue that may be raised with the panel of the Board hearing this matter.
10The company 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.
11Any 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).
12The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board