1012-00-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Applicant v. Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation Windsor Racetrack Slots, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Timothy W Sargeant, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and R. R. Montague.
DECISION OF TIMOTHY W. SARGEANT, VICE CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER R. R. MONTAGUE; July 6, 2000
This is an application for certification.
The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”).
Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Board further finds that:
all Security Officers of the Respondent employed at 5555 Ojibway Parkway, Windsor, Ontario, save and except Dual Security/Supervisor Officers and persons above the rank of Dual Security/Supervisors Officers and Surveillance Personnel and Office and Clerical,
constitute a unit of employees of the responding party appropriate for collective bargaining.
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.
Having regard to the agreement of the parties as to the appropriate bargaining unit, the Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all Security Officers of the Respondent employed at 5555 Ojibway Parkway, Windsor, Ontario, save and except Dual Security/Supervisor Officers and persons above the rank of Dual Security/Supervisors Officers and Surveillance Personnel and Office and Clerical.
The vote will be held on July 10, 2000 arrangements will be as directed by the Registrar and set out on the attached Notice of Vote and of Hearing.
All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on June 30, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on June 30, 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.
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.
The employer has given the Board notice under section 8.1 of the Act that it disagrees with the union’s estimate of the number of individuals in the bargaining unit included in the application for certification. However, the Board has determined that regardless of which number is used regarding the number of individuals in the bargaining unit, not less than forty percent of the individuals proposed in the bargaining unit in the application for certification were members of the union at the time the application was made. In the circumstances there will be no order directing that the ballot box be sealed.
10 The responding party is directed to post copies of this decision and of the "Notice of Vote and of Hearing" adjacent to the "Notice to Employees of Application for Certification". These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
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, 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).
The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Timothy W. Sargeant”
for the majority
DECISION OF BOARD MEMBER J. A. RONSON; July 6, 2000
The employer has pleaded that section 8.1 applies. As a result, there should be no vote until the issues are dealt with at a hearing. If a vote is ordered, then at the least, the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues are resolved.
“J. A. Ronson”