0386-01-R United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union 46, Applicant v. A & E Plumbing Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 3, 2001
1The Board, by decision in this matter released earlier today, directed a representation vote among employees of the responding party. The voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
2The Board noted at paragraph 3 of that decision that "The Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183, which was named by the applicant as a trade union known to the applicant which claims to represent employees who may be affected by this application, was also served with the application on April 30, 2001 and did not file an intervention within the time stipulated by Rule 135 of the Board's Rules."
3After the Board's earlier decision was made and while the representation vote material was being processed, the Board received at approximately 11:30 a.m. on May 3, 2001, Form A-73 Intervention in Application for Certification on behalf of Universal Workers Union Local 183 ("Local 183"). That intervention was delivered to the Board by Priority Courier, apparently having been given to Priority Courier on May 2, 2001. There was nothing on the envelope containing the intervention to indicate the date it was given to Priority Courier. Local 183 did not provide a receipt from Priority Courier showing this date. (I note that the Certificate of Delivery filed by Local 183 indicates that the intervention had been delivered to the applicant and the responding party by facsimile transmission at approximately 3:30 p.m. on May 2, 2001.)
4This application is an application to which Part VI of the Board's Rules of Procedure apply (Rules for Certification and Termination Applications in the Construction Industry). Rule 135 provides:
A responding party must file a response to the application, including Schedule A, not later than two (2) days after the application was delivered to it.
Rule 129 provides:
The date of filing is the date that a document is received by the Board. However, if an application is sent by Priority Courier, the date of filing is the date on which the application is sent (as verified by the Post Office). [emphasis added]
Rule 1(m) defines a responding party as including an intervenor while Rule 1(n) defines a response as including an intervention. Rule 18 of the Board's Rules permits a response to an application for certification to be filed with the Board under Rule 135 by facsimile transmission. Rules 16 and 17 also permit an intervention to be filed in any manner other than by e-mail or registered mail.
5The intervention by Local 183 was filed by Priority Courier. An intervention is not an application. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 129, the intervention of Local 183 was filed on May 3, 2000. It was an untimely intervention because Local 183 filed it more than two days after the application was delivered to Local 183 and, pursuant to Rule 41, the Board directed a representation vote and determined the form of the ballot based on the material that was properly before it, without regard to the untimely intervention filed by Local 183.
6The Board's determination in this decision with respect to the timeliness of the intervention does not preclude Local 183 from seeking leave of the Board to intervene in the proceedings after the representation vote is conducted.
7This panel of the Board is not seized with this matter.
"Harry Freedman"
for the Board