3780-99-R United Steelworkers of America, Applicant v. Primary Response Inc., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and
R. R. Montague.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 23, 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 (the “Act”).
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 the Responding Party in the City of Toronto, the City of Mississauga, the City of Vaughan and the Town of Markham save and except Mobile Supervisors, persons above the rank of Mobile Supervisor, Dispatchers, Mobile Officers, and office, clerical and sales staff.
5. The vote will be held on March 27, 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 March 20, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on March 20, 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 is a dispute between the parties as to whether the bargaining unit description should be described as “All employees of the Responding Party in the City of Toronto, the City of Mississauga, the City of Vaughan and the Town of Markham…” or as “All employees of the Responding Party in the City of Toronto…” If any individual who is not in the City of Toronto wishes to cast a ballot, the individual shall identify himself or herself as occupying a disputed position and such individual shall then be entitled to cast a ballot. Any ballot cast by such an individual shall be segregated and not counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree.
8. There is a further dispute between the parties as to whether or not the position of Mobile Officer should be included in the bargaining unit. If any individual who is not in the City of Toronto wishes to cast a ballot, the individual shall identify himself or herself as occupying a disputed position and such individual shall then be entitled to cast a ballot. Any ballot cast by such an individual shall be segregated and not counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree.
9. 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.
10. The responding party has given timely notice under section 8.1 that it disagrees with the description of the bargaining unit and asserts that the description could not be appropriate. The Board finds that the bargaining unit proposed in the application for certification could be appropriate for collective bargaining.
11. The employer has given the Board timely 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. Upon a review of the material filed with the application for certification and the employer’s response, the Board cannot be absolutely certain that the percentage of the individuals who appear to be members of the trade union is 40 percent or more in the bargaining unit proposed by the applicant. In these circumstances, the Board directs that the ballot box from the representation vote be sealed. The ballots will not be counted until the Board so orders or the applicant and responding party agree.
12. 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.
13. 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).
14. The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Timothy W. Sargeant”
for the Board