Teamsters International Union, Local 847, AFL-CIO-CLC v. Royal Dynamics Co.
File No.: 2257-01-R Date: November 16, 2001
2257-01-R Teamsters International Union, Local 847, AFL-CIO-CLC, Applicant v. Royal Dynamics Co., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Anthony Brown, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and H. Peacock.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 16, 2001
1This is an application for certification.
2The Registrar has certified that the applicant had been found to be a trade union in an earlier proceeding under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). Therefore, having regard to the Registrar’s certificate and section 113 of the Act, the Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Act.
3It appears to the Board on an examination of only the information provided in the application and the 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 Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of Royal Dynamics Co., located at 20 Royal Group Crescent, Woodbridge, Ontario, save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, clerical, office, sales, accounting staff, and students employed during the summer vacation period.
5The vote will be held on November 20, 2001. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
6All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on November 13, 2001, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on November 13, 2001, 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.
7Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
8The 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 but has agreed that the ballots cast should be counted.
9After 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.
10The applicant’s bargaining unit description excludes managers and supervisors, whereas the responding party’s description excludes supervisors but does not mention managers. Therefore, there may be a dispute over whether the position of “manager” (as distinct from “supervisor”) should be included in the bargaining unit. If an individual in such a disputed position wishes to cast a ballot, his or her ballot shall be segregated and not counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree.
11The 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.
12Any 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).
13The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Anthony Brown”
for the Board