Industrial, Wood and Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A. Canada) v. ARAMARK Canada Ltd.
2497-01-R Industrial, Wood and Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A. Canada), Applicant v. ARAMARK Canada Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Marilyn Silverman, Vice‑Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 7, 2001
1This purports to be a displacement application.
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.
3The responding party, although duly served with the application material on December 4, 2001, according to the certificate of delivery filed by the applicant, failed to file its response with the Board within the time stipulated by Rule 69 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.
4The Board has not received the Confirmation of Posting (Form A-5) from the responding party. The responding party is directed to post and return the Confirmation of Posting to the Registrar forthwith.
5The applicant advises that The Workers Union of Queen Elizabeth Hospital may claim to represent employees who may be affected by this application. The applicant’s Certificate of Delivery confirms that that entity has been served with the application. No intervention has been filed. However, the applicant has filed what purports to be a collective agreement with a bargaining unit description that covers the employees who are the subject of this application.
6It 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.
7The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of ARAMARK Canada Ltd. employed in the Food Management Services at the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute at 130 Dunn Avenue and 500 University Avenue, Toronto locations, save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, dietitians, student dietitians, chef, assistant chef, and office staff.
8The vote will be held on December 11, 2001. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
9All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on December 4, 2001, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on December 4, 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.
10Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant or The Workers Union of Queen Elizabeth Hospital in their employment relations with the responding party.
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.
“Marilyn Silverman”
for the Board