National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW‑Canada) v. Pillsbury Bakery and Food Services Ltd.
1848-01-R National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW‑Canada), Applicant v. Pillsbury Bakery and Food Services Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Mary Anne McKellar, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and D. A. Patterson.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; October 9, 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 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 Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of Pillsbury Bakery and Food Services Ltd. in Trenton, Ontario, save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisors, office, clerical, sales, engineering staff and students employed for the summer.
5The vote will be held on October 11 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 October 3, 2001, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on October 3, 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.
7The responding party disagrees with the applicant’s proposed bargaining unit description and proposes that it be geographically restricted to the responding party’s premises at 354 Tate Road, Trenton. If any individual holding a position in dispute as a result of this difference wishes to cast a ballot, the individual shall identify himself or herself as occupying a disputed position and such individual shall then be entitled to cast a ballot. Any ballot cast by such an individual shall be segregated and not counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree. A determination with respect to the appropriate bargaining unit description may be dealt with by the Board at a hearing after the vote, if necessary.
8Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
9The 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.
10Any 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).
11The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Mary Anne McKellar”
for the Board