International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Construction Council of Ontario v. Konecranes Canada Inc. o/a Crane Pro Services
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Construction Council of Ontario, Applicant v. Konecranes Canada Inc. o/a Crane Pro Services, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Inge M. Stamp, Vice-Chair, and Board Members G Pickell and G. McMenemy.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; September 12, 2001
Decision of the Board
1These are applications for certification.
2In its five decisions in these matters, dated September 5, 2001, the Board (differently constituted) directed the taking of representation votes on September 7, 2001. On September 6, 2001, counsel for the applicant filed correspondence seeking leave of the Board to withdraw all five matters. Inadvertently, the correspondence was not brought to the attention of the Board’s Vote Coordinator, and consequently, the representation votes proceeded on September 7, 2001.
3Counsel for the responding party contends that the Board should exercise its discretion pursuant to subsections 7(8) and 7(9) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (“the Act”) to impose a bar to further applications for certification. Counsel characterizes the September 6, 2001 correspondence from counsel for the applicant as a “late withdrawal”, alleges manipulation of the Board’s procedure by the applicant, and cites the disruption to the responding party’s operations as reasons justifying the request for the imposition of a bar.
4We are not persuaded by the submissions of the responding party. The request to withdraw the applications can hardly be characterized as “late”, as the applicant sought to withdraw a day before the scheduled vote. The alleged disruption caused to the employer’s operations was not due to the applicant’s request to withdraw, but rather to inadvertence on the Board’s part. There is nothing to suggest manipulation of Board procedure. Thus, the considerations articulated in the Sara Lee case (and in several Board decisions since, including Baron Metal Industries Inc., [1999] OLRB Rep. May/June 363; Canadian Opera Company, [1999] OLRB Rep. Sept./Oct. 804; Peak Frean, a Division of Christie Brown & Co. [2000] O.L.R.D. No. 1931) for the imposition of a bar are not present in the matter before us.
5For these reasons, we decline the responding party’s request to impose a bar pursuant to section 7(9) of the Act.
6These applications are hereby withdrawn with leave of the Board.
“Inge M. Stamp”
for the Board