Ontario Labour Relations Board
0012-01-R The Unionized Employees of Ariss Concrete Forming Ltd., Applicant v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council and Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1081, Responding Party.
BEFORE: John Morgan Lewis, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 8, 2001
This is a Request for Reconsideration of the Board’s decision dated April 11, 2001. The request has been filed on behalf of Labourers’ International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council and Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1081 (hereinafter referred collectively as the “union”).
In its decision dated April 11, 2001, the Board directed a representation vote with respect to an application for termination. The applicant is seeking to terminate bargaining rights with respect to the Provincial ICI collective agreement between the Labourers’ Employer Bargaining Agency and Labourers’ International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council with an effective date of May 1, 1998, until April 30, 2001 (the “ICI Collective Agreement”). The applicant is also seeking to terminate bargaining rights with respect to a collective agreement between the Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1081 and Ariss Concrete Forming Ltd. (“Ariss”) with an effective date of May 1, 1998, until April 30, 2001 (the “low rise forming collective agreement”).
The representation vote was held on April 17, 2001 at which time the union challenged all the individuals who cast a ballot.
The union asserts that it holds bargaining rights with respect to Ariss only in the ICI sector of the construction industry and that the only collective agreement to which Ariss is bound is the Provincial ICI Collective Agreement. The union denies that it holds bargaining rights with respect to all other sectors other than the ICI sector with respect to the employees of Ariss and indicates that Ariss is not bound to the low rise forming collective agreement.
In light of its position as described above, the union requests that the Board reconsider its finding contained in the April 11, 2001 decision that not less than forty per cent of the employees in the ICI and non-ICI bargaining units had expressed a wish not to be represented by the Union. The union further asserts that the applicant represented that it was relying upon membership evidence from employees whom the union does not represent (i.e. those not working under the ICI collective agreement on the application date). The union contends that no information was provided to the Board which could have enabled it to determine which, if any, of the membership evidence was relevant to the Board’s determination. Thus, it is argued, the applicant lacked the necessary support to entitle it to a vote.
The Board hereby declines to determine the reconsideration request at this time. The Board notes that the ballots cast in the representation vote have not been counted. The Registrar is directed to set this matter down for hearing at which time the parties will have the opportunity to argue before the Board whether Ariss was bound to the low rise forming collective agreement. If it is determined that Ariss was not bound, the Board can then determine which individuals were at work in the ICI sector of the construction industry on the date of application and thus entitled to cast a representation ballot. Once that determination is made, the union may then wish to renew its reconsideration request with respect to whether not less than forty per cent of the affected employees had expressed their wish not to be represented by the union.
This matter is referred to the Registrar.
This panel of the Board is seized with this matter.
“John Morgan Lewis”
for the Board