0401-01-R Canadian Union of Skilled Workers, Applicant v. Powertel Utilities Contractors Inc., Responding Party v. IBEW Construction Council of Ontario, Intervenor.
BEFORE: John Morgan Lewis, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. Knight and A. Haward.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 4, 2001
This is a displacement application for certification filed under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the "Act").
The Board has not found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of sections (1) and 126 of the Act. Accordingly, the applicant will have to prove its status at the hearing of this application.
The employees are currently represented by the intervenor.
The responding party and intervenor were duly served with the application on May 1, 2001, according to the Certificate of Delivery filed by the applicant and filed their response and intervention with the Board within the time stipulated by Rule 135 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.
It 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.
The Board further finds that this application does not relate to the industrial, commercial and institutional sector of the construction industry referred to in section 126 of the Act.
The responding party and intervenor dispute the applicant’s estimate of the number of employees in the applicant’s proposed bargaining unit. Furthermore, the responding party and intervenor propose a different bargaining unit than that proposed by the applicant and they contend that the applicant’s bargaining unit is not appropriate. In light of this dispute, the Board declines to make a finding at this time with respect to the appropriateness of the applicant’s proposed bargaining unit. This matter may be raised with the panel of the Board hearing this matter after the representation vote.
Having regard to the Board’s established practice of directing a representation vote of the largest possible voting constituency, the Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all foremen, journeymen, linemen-splicers, apprentice linemen-splicers, groundman/equipment operators, groundman/drivers, groundmen, utilitymen and foresters in the employ of Powertel Utilities Contractors Inc. in all sectors of the construction industry in the Province of Ontario, excluding the industrial, commercial and institutional sector, save and except non-working foremen and persons above the rank of non-working foreman.
The vote will be held on May 16, 2001. Vote arrangements are set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Meeting".
The responding party is directed to post copies of the application for certification, the “Notice to Employees of Application for Certification”, this decision and the "Notice of Vote and of Meeting" in a location or locations where they are most likely to come to the attention of those individuals who are eligible to vote. These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
All individuals who were employed by Powertel Utilities Contractors Inc. and at work in the voting constituency on April 30, 2001 are eligible to vote.
Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant or the intervenor in their employment relations with the responding party.
Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue relating to the application for certification which remains in dispute, other than status disputes, must file a detailed statement of representations and all material facts upon which they rely with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received 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. 9: Status Disputes in Certification Applications in the Construction Industry.
This matter is referred to the Registrar.
“John Morgan Lewis”
for the Board