Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Résidence St. Louis
1679-01-R Canadian Union of Public Employees, Applicant v. Résidence St. Louis, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Caroline Rowan, Vice‑Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; September 21, 2001
1This is an application for certification.
2The Registrar has certified that the applicant had been found to be a trade union in an earlier proceeding under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). Therefore, having regard to the Registrar’s certificate and section 113 of the Act, the Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of 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 Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees employed by Résidence St. Louis in the City of Ottawa, save and except RN’s and graduate nurses, professional medical staff, office and clerical staff, supervisors and persons above the rank of supervisor and those persons for whom a trade union held bargaining rights on the date of application.
5The vote will be held on September 25, 2001. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
6All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on September 17, 2001, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on September 17, 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.
7The responding party asserts that the bargaining unit proposed by the applicant in its application is not appropriate. It suggests instead that the employees in issue should be included in an existing bargaining unit represented by CUPE Local 3189 and that the existing bargaining unit description relating to employees currently represented by CUPE Local 3189 should be revised accordingly. Although it is not entirely clear whether the responding party is asking the Board to revise the existing bargaining unit description, the Board notes that it will not do so, except in limited circumstances, which are not applicable here. It is, however, open to the parties to do so on agreement (see section 58(5) of the Act). The question of whether or not the bargaining unit proposed by the applicant is an appropriate one will be dealt with by the Board at a hearing after the vote, if necessary.
8Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
9The 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.
10Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, other than status disputes, 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).
11The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Caroline Rowan”
for the Board