McMaster University Staff Association v. McMaster University
2484-01-R McMaster University Staff Association, Applicant v. McMaster University, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and R. R. Montague.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 6, 2001
1This is an application for certification.
2The responding party identified by the applicant in the style of cause is McMaster University. In paragraph 1(c) of the application, in which the name, address, telephone number and facsimile number of the responding party and contact person are required, the applicant lists the following:
Mr. Mark Haley, Assistant Vice-President (Human Resources) Gilmour Hall – Room 306 McMaster University 1280 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 Voice land line: (905) 525-9140 ext. 24391 Fax: (905) 528-6132
Leena Jaanimagi, Executive Director Regional Medical Associates 50 Main Street East, 1st Floor McMaster Downtown Campus Hamilton, Ontario L8N 1E9 Voice land line: (905) 525-9140 ext. 23256 Fax: (905) 529-7998
3The applicant proposes a bargaining unit consisting of:
all employees of the McMaster University unit named “Regional Medical Associates” except for the Executive Director.
4According to the responses filed by both McMaster University (“McMaster”) and Regional Medical Associates of Hamilton (“RMAH”), McMaster does not employ the employees affected by this application. Both McMaster and RMAH refer to a February 9, 2000 decision of the Board (differently constituted) which resulted in the certification of the applicant in respect of certain non-academic employees of McMaster. That decision ([2000] O.L.R.D. No. 223) incorporated the agreement of the parties with respect to the description of, and clarity notes regarding, the bargaining unit.
5The second of the clarity notes lists a number of organizations as of March 2, 1999 which were affiliated with McMaster. The parties agreed that the employees of those affiliated organizations are not employees of McMaster. One of the affiliated organizations listed is “Regional Medical Associates”, apparently the same entity identified in paragraph 1(c) of this application.
6Both McMaster and RMAH also refer to a collective agreement between McMaster and the applicant. McMaster filed a copy of that collective agreement. It contains a recognition clause that defines the applicant’s bargaining rights in terms of the certificate issued by the Board following the Board’s February 9, 2000 decision. The February 9, 2000 decision is found in the collective agreement as an appendix.
7If the employees who are the subject of this application for certification are not employees of McMaster, it would appear that the application, in its current form, will fail. McMaster has filed documents in its response that appear to suggest that the applicant and McMaster have previously agreed the employees in the Regional Medical Associates unit are not employees of McMaster. If that is so, and remains the case, no certificate could issue in the applicant’s favour with respect to McMaster.
8Both McMaster and RMAH contend that the Board should dismiss this application without ordering a representation vote. Before considering whether or not to order a vote, the Board directs the applicant to file and deliver written submissions on or before 12:00 p.m., Friday, December 7, 2001, as to why the application should not be dismissed, given the apparent circumstances outlined in this decision.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board