Ontario Labour Relations Board
The Laurentian University Faculty Association, Applicant v. The University of Sudbury, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 4, 2001
Decision
1This is a request for reconsideration of a decision of the Board (differently constituted) dated November 30, 2001 in which it ordered a representation vote to take place on December 5, 2001, and declined the request of the responding party (“the university”) for a mail-in vote. This request for reconsideration was received by the Board via facsimile transmission on December 4, 2001.
2The university asks that the Board reconsider the mail-in option to accommodate the interests of nine of its faculty who live in areas remote from the university’s Sudbury campus. In the alternative, the university asks for the establishment of four polls in Timmins, Moose Factory, Little Current and Quebec City in addition to the single poll in Sudbury that was established by the Registrar pursuant to the Board’s direction in the decision of November 30, 2001. In the further alternative, the university submits that the off-campus faculty members not be included in the bargaining unit because they have no reasonable opportunity to participate in the vote.
3The university offered no further compelling reasons for a mail-in vote that could not have been raised initially in its response to the application for certification. In neither its response to the application for certification or in its request for reconsideration did the university explain in sufficient detail how and where the work of the off-campus faculty is carried out. Secondly, given that the representation vote is scheduled to take place on December 5, 2001, there is not sufficient time now to marshal the Board’s resources to monitor four additional polls across two provinces, even if we were to accept the validity of the university’s request for additional polls. Moreover, in its response to the application for certification, the university could well have anticipated the possibility that the Board would not order a mail-in vote, and asked for the five polls it now states is appropriate. It did not do so. Thirdly, we reject the university’s argument that the off-campus faculty should be excluded from the bargaining unit merely because they may not exercise their right to participate in the vote. There is no merit to that submission, and in any event, it too could have been made in the university’s response to the application, but was not.
4The request for reconsideration is denied.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board