1878-00-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Applicant v. Nipigon District Memorial Hospital (Paramedical Employees), Responding Party v. Service Employees International Union, Local 268, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and D. A. Patterson.
DECISION OF PATRICK KELLY, VICE-CHAIR, AND BOARD MEMBER D. A. PATTERSON: September 28, 2000
1This is a displacement application for certification.
2The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”).
3The employees are currently represented by the intervenor.
4It 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. Further, this application appears to be timely.
5The responding party disputes the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the applicant's proposed bargaining unit. It gives notice under section 8.1 of the Act.
6The Board finds that the bargaining unit described in the application could be appropriate. After comparing the membership evidence provided by the applicant as against the information provided by the responding party, the Board finds that the numerical difference between the parties is not significant. The applicant has established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit for the purposes of obtaining a representation vote and having that vote counted. In any event, the responding party agreed that the ballots cast in the representation vote should be counted.
7The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all paramedical employees of Nipigon District Memorial Hospital in the Townships of Nipigon, Red Rock, Beardmore and Dorion, and the Villages of Lyon and Stirling, save and except supervisors and persons above the rank of supervisor.
8The vote will be held on October 2, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
9All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on September 25, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on September 25, 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.
10The intervenor has filed a number of submissions in respect of unfair labour practices that are alleged to have occurred in respect of this application. In addition, it alleges a breach by the applicant of an Order of the Supreme Court of Justice. It also refers to a breach by the applicant of the constitution of the Canadian Labour Congress. The intervenor asserts that in the circumstances no representation vote should be held, or, in the alternative, that the ballot box should be sealed.
11The Board has considered similar objections from the intervenor with respect to a number of other displacement applications by the applicant. Ultimately, the Board rejected the objections as a basis for refusing to order a representation vote or for sealing the ballot box.
12We are not persuaded that there is a reason to forestall the representation vote or seal the ballot box in the instant application.
13The intervenor states that there are two separate bargaining units, one for full-time and one for part-time paramedical employees. The applicant submits that there is one existing bargaining unit, although the collective agreement contains a part-time addendum. The responding party took no position on the appropriate bargaining unit structure.
14The issue of the number of bargaining units may, if necessary, be dealt with by the panel assigned to hear this matter. Individuals wishing to cast ballots are to identify themselves as full-time or part-time employees. Given the intervenor’s position, the ballots cast by the part-time employees shall be segregated from those cast by the full-time paramedical employees and counted separately.
15Voters will be asked to indicate whether they wish to be represented by the applicant or the intervenor in their employment relations with the responding party.
16The 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.
17Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, 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).
18The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the majority
DECISION OF BOARD MEMBER J. A. RONSON; September 28, 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”