Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Markham Stouffville Hospital
0608-01-R Canadian Union of Public Employees, Applicant v. Markham Stouffville Hospital, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice‑Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and H. Peacock.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 25, 2001
1This is an application for certification.
2The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (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 responding party disputes the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the applicant's proposed bargaining unit. Furthermore, the responding party proposes a different bargaining unit than that proposed by the applicant and it contends that the applicant's bargaining unit could not be appropriate. It gives notice under section 8.1 of the Act.
5The Board finds that the bargaining unit described in the application could be appropriate. Upon a review of the material filed with the application for certification and the employer's response, the Board cannot be absolutely certain that the percentage of individuals who appear to be members of the trade union is 40 percent or more in the bargaining unit proposed by the applicant. The applicant has established sufficient membership support based on the information only in the application for the purposes of obtaining a representation vote. However, in these circumstances the Board directs tha the ballot box from the representation vote be sealed. The ballots will not be counted until the Board so orders or the parties agree.
6The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of Markham Stouffville Hospital, working in a service capacity, save and except managers, persons above the rank of manager and persons who are employed for more than 24 hours per week.
7The vote will be held on May 29, 2001. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
8All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on May 22, 2001, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on May 22, 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.
9There is a dispute between the parties as to the applicants description of the bargaining unit. It is difficult to define precisely the differences as to positions that should or should not be included in the bargaining unit. The responding party has proposed the following bargaining unit:
all employees of Markham Souffville Hospital in the Town of Markham, save and except professional medical staff, registered, graduate and undergraduate nurses, paramedical and technical personnel, office and clerical staff, co-ordinators, persons above the rank of co-ordinator, persons regularly employed for more than twenty-four (24 hours) per week, and students employed during the school vacation period.
If an individual is in dispute as a result of the parties' postions and such individual wishes to cast a ballot, such individual shall be entitled to cast a ballot. Any ballot cast by such an individual shall be segregated and not counted till the Board so orders or the parties agree.
10Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
11The responding party asks that the applicant not be provided with Schedule "A" to the rsponse given the vast difference in the estimate of the parties as to the number of individuals in the applicant's proposed bargaining unit. The Board does not agree with such submission and is not prepared to depart from the Rules or normal practice in this regard. The applicant is entitled to be provided with Schedule "A" to the response.
12The 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.
13Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, 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).
14The matter is referred to the Registrar.
"Timothy W. Sargeant"
for the Board