2264-00-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Applicant v. Freighliner Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Bram Herlich, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and D. A. Patterson.
DECISION OF BRAM HERLICH, VICE-CHAIR, AND BOARD MEMBER D. A. PATTERSON; November 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”).
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.
The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of Freightliner Ltd. in Mississauga, Ontario, save and except supervisor(s), persons above the rank of supervisor, office and clerical and employees covered by the terms of any subsisting collective agreement as of November 1, 2000.
The vote will be held on November 8, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined 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 November 1, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on November 1, 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.
There are a number of possible disputes between the parties which appear to be crystallized principally in the applicant’s failure and the employer’s desire to restrict the bargaining unit to a particular street location [6701 Financial Drive] and operation [PDC]. This potential dispute may necessitate the sealing of ballots cast by individuals whose employment engages those issues. However, since the applicant does not appear to be seeking, for example, to displace bargaining rights held by any other trade union the Board has adjusted the voting constituencies accordingly.
Although the responding party has filed a notice under section 8.1, it has agreed to the counting of the ballots.
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 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.
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).
The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Bram Herlich”
for the majority
DECISION OF BOARD MEMBER J. A. RONSON; November 6, 2000
It would appear that if the ballots are counted notwithstanding the responding party’s section 8.1 notice, there may be no bar if the union loses the vote. In the circumstances then, no vote should take place until the secton 8.1 issues are dealt with at the 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”