Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Eptcon Ltd.
File No.: 0312-01-R Date: May 2, 2001
Canadian Union of Skilled Workers, Applicant v. Eptcon Ltd., Responding Party v. IBEW Construction Council of Ontario, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Marilyn Silverman, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1This is an application for certification filed under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the "Act"). The applicant seeks to displace the intervenor as bargaining agent for:
The Contractor recognizes the Union as the sole Bargaining Agent for all Foremen, Journeyman, Linemen-Splicers, Apprentice Linemen-Splicers, Groundman/Equipment Operators, Groundman/Drivers, Groundmen, Utilitymen and Foresters performing work within the acknowledged jurisdiction of the Union.
2The Board has not found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of sections 1(1) and 126 of the Act. Accordingly, the applicant will have to prove its status at the hearing of this application.
3It 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.
4The responding party disputes the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the applicant's proposed bargaining unit. Furthermore, the responding party proposes a different bargaining unit than that proposed by the applicant and it contends that the applicant's bargaining unit could not be appropriate. It gives notice under section 8.1 of the Act.
5The 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.
6The Board further finds that the unit of employees described in paragraph 1 above could constitute a unit of employees of the responding party appropriate for collective bargaining.
7Having regard to the Board's finding as to the appropriate bargaining unit, the Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all Foremen, Journeyman, Linemen-Splicers, Apprentice Linemen-Splicers, Groundman/Equipment Operators, Groundman/Drivers, Groundmen, Utilitymen and Foresters performing work within the acknowledged jurisdiction of the Union.
8The vote will be held on May 7, 2001. Vote arrangements are set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Meeting".
9The intervenor submits that the bargaining unit that the applicant seeks is not appropriate. The intervenor argues that the applicant is only entitled to bargaining rights in the Board Area in which work is being performed on the application date. This matter can be raised before the panel hearing this application.
10The responding party is directed to post copies of the application for certification, the "Notice to Employees of Application for Certification", this decision and the "Notice of Vote and of Meeting" in a location or locations where they are most likely to come to the attention of those individuals who are eligible to vote. These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
11All individuals who were employed by Eptcon Ltd. and at work in the voting constituency on April 26, 2001 are eligible to vote.
12Voters 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.
13Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue relating to the application for certification which remains in dispute, other than status disputes, must file a detailed statement of representations and all material facts upon which they rely with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received 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. 9: Status Disputes in Certification Applications in the Construction Industry.
14This matter is referred to the Registrar.
"Marilyn Silverman"
for the Board