0176-01-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Applicant v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Responding Party v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 and United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 393W, Intervenors.
0178-01-U National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Worker Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 385, Applicant v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 and Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Responding Parties.
0179-01-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 385, Applicant v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175, Responding Party v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Intervenor.
0203-01-R United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Applicant v. Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd, Responding Party v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Intervenor.
BEFORE: Stephen Raymond, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and H. Peacock.
APPEARANCES: Frank Luce, Dan MacPherson and Kim Birmingham for the applicant; Chuck R. Robertson, Shane Smith, Larry H. Abrams and Leslee Wills for the responding party; and D. Wray, Mini Jones and Dorothy Gossi for UFCW; D. Wray, Mini Jones and W. Hanley for UFCW Local 175; D. Wray, Mini Jones and Tony DiBartolomew for UFCW Local 393-W.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; June 8, 2001
Board File 0176-01-R is an application for certification pursuant to the Labour Relations Act, 1995, as amended (“the Act”) by National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) for certification of a group of employees of Coca-Cola Bottling Company.
Board File 0178-01-U is an application pursuant to section 96 of the Act by National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 385 alleging that the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 and Coca-Cola Bottling Company have violated the Act.
Board File 0179-01-R is an application for termination of bargaining rights pursuant to section 66 of the Act by National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 385 against the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175.
Board File 0203-01-R is an application for certification pursuant to the Act by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union of a group of employees of Coca-Cola Bottling Company.
A hearing was held on April 25, 2001. The parties agreed to argue a preliminary issue as to whether the Board should order a representation vote in the applications for certification.
All of these applications arise out of a desire to be the bargaining agent for a group of employees of Coca-Cola at its new Brampton facility. Both the CAW, UFCW, Local 175 and UFCW, Local 393W have provisions in their existing collective agreements with Coca-Cola that provide for an extension of their bargaining rights to a new facility within 50 miles of the location where bargaining rights are held if the following conditions are also met. Article 18.01 (d) of the collective agreement between UFCW, Local 175 and Coca-Cola Bottling is typical of the language used:
18.01 (d) Should any major operation currently being performed by the bargaining unit be transferred from a location covered by this Agreement to another Company location or a related Company location within a fifty (50) mile radius of Brampton, then the employees who have been performing this work shall, to the extent required, be transferred to the new location, with full seniority, if they so desire. Such transfer shall not be unreasonably denied.
In addition, if employees transferred under this provision represent a majority of employees at the new location, the Union will be recognized as representing all employees at such location and the terms and conditions of this Agreement will be deemed to apply to them for the balance of its duration.
Coca-Cola and UFCW, Local 175 take the position that UFCW, Local 175 has the bargaining rights for the facility pursuant to the terms of its collective agreement because the initial staffing of the Brampton facility was entirely from members of its Local. It is planned that members of UFCW, Local 175 and the CAW will join the employment complement at the Brampton facility over the next few weeks and in any case no later than mid-July. As we understand it, when the Brampton facility is fully staffed, none of UFCW, Local 175, UFCW, Local 393W nor the CAW will have 50% of its former members as the employee complement of the Brampton facility.
The CAW filed an application for certification for the Brampton facility but indicated that the employees were currently working at four distinct Coca-Cola facilities. The next day, UFCW International Union applied for certification for the Brampton facility. In the face of these two applications, the Board decided on April 20, 2001 to not hold a vote and to schedule a hearing to address various matters that arise out of these circumstances.
The Board issued an oral decision at the hearing declining to immediately order a vote of the persons who, it is intended, will form the employee complement at the Brampton facility. The Board stated that while it is important to determine the wishes of the employees and, that may indeed ultimately occur, that the issue of whether UFCW, Local 175 has bargaining rights for the Brampton facility is a fundamental issue that needs to be determined. Given the additional difficulty of an application for certification for a particular location in which the applicant requests to hold a vote at four other locations, the Board felt, in the particular circumstances of this matter, that a delay of the vote was appropriate. The Board also indicated that it would entertain a further request to hold the vote at a time when the employees who are working at the Brampton facility are in place.
This matter is scheduled to continue on June 19, 20, 21, 29 and July 23, 24, 2001 before this panel of the Board.
“Stephen Raymond”
for the Board