IN THE MATTER OF THE CANADA LABOUR CODE Part 1 - Industrial Relations

Transcription

1 B E T W E E N : IN THE MATTER OF THE CANADA LABOUR CODE Part 1 - Industrial Relations UNLAWFUL LABOUR PRACTISES COMPLAINT Pursuant to Section 97(1) alleging a violation of Section 50(a) and Section 94(1)(a) and section 94(3)(a)(i) of the CANADA LABOUR CODE Unifor Applicant - and - United Airlines, Inc. Respondents (A) Full Name and Address of Applicant: Unifor 205 Placer Court Toronto, ON M2H 3H9 Attention: Leslie Dias, National Representative Tel: Fax: leslie.dias@unifor.org Unifor Local Tranmere Drive Unit 5 Mississauga, ON L5S 1M2 Attention: Jamie Ross, President Tel: Fax: jamie@unifor2002.org

2 (B) For Service: Unifor Legal Department 205 Placer Court, Toronto, ON M2H 3H9 Attn: Anthony F. Dale, Associate Counsel Tel: Fax: (C) Full Name and Address of Respondent: United Airlines, Inc. WHQLR Willis Tower, 25 th Floor 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL Attn: Thomas Reardon, Director, Labour Relations Tel: Fax: (D) Nature of the Violations: See Schedule A (E) Particulars of the Complaint: See Schedule A (F) Orders Sought by the Applicant: See Schedule B

3 (G) Request for Hearing The applicant requests that a hearing be convened for the purpose of presenting oral argument and evidence. Dated at Toronto this 18 th day of March, 2014 Unifor Legal Department 205 Placer Court Toronto, ON M2H 3H9 Anthony F. Dale afdale@caw.ca Tel: (416) Fax: (416) Lawyer for the Applicant

4 Schedule A Schedule A Background 1. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) is the certified bargaining agent pursuant to the Canada Labour Code for a bargaining unit comprising all customer service representatives employed by United Airlines, Inc. at the Lester B. Pearson International Airport, Mississauga, Ontario, excluding supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, office and sales staff (Order No U, June 20, See Document #1 attached). 2. That Certification Order followed the Board s decision earlier in 2013 in United Airlines 2013 CIRB 671), made in the context of a sale of business application arising from a merger or amalgamation of United Airlines and Continental Airlines. The Board determined that two separate bargaining units of employees of the two predecessor employers were to be consolidated. United Airlines employees at Pearson were represented by CAW-Canada. Continental Airlines employees at Pearson were represented by International Association of Machinists and Allied Workers (IAMAW) 3. The Board then on June 21, 2013 (United Airlines 2013 CIRB 686) determined that the two collective agreements that applied to the consolidated bargaining unit would both expire on September 6, 2013 (see Document #2 attached). The terms and conditions contained in those collective agreements continue to apply to employees in the consolidated bargaining unit during collective bargaining as of the date of this application. 4. Unifor was established on August 31, 2013 and on September 1, 2013 it entered into a merger agreement with CAW-Canada so that CAW-Canada has ceased to have any separate identity and is now Unifor. In a separate application, Unifor has applied under section 18 and 43 of the Code for a declaration that it is the

5 Schedule A successor of CAW-Canada with respect to the consolidated bargaining unit at Pearson. In this application, a reference to Unifor is intended as a reference also to CAW-Canada prior to the creation of Unifor and its merger with CAW-Canada. 5. In anticipation of the expiry of the two collective agreements on September 6, 2013, Unifor required United Airlines to begin to bargain for the making of a single collective agreement that would apply to all employees in the consolidated bargaining unit. Unifor met in collective bargaining with United on July 30, August 9, September 19 and 20, 2013 and January 16, All non-monetary issues were settled in the course of the 2013 bargaining sessions. A scheduled meeting in November to begin bargaining about pension, benefits and other monetary issues was cancelled by United. It attributed that cancellation to a need to consider the harmonization of pensions and benefits across the three restructured bargaining units in Canada. 7. Prior to February 19, 2014, United said nothing to Unifor that suggested an intention to contract out all of the work of its unionized employees in the bargaining unit would be laid-off and terminated. In fact it said the opposite when asked by Unifor to consider collective agreement language that would limit or prohibit the contractingout of bargaining unit work. 8. During bargaining about non-monetary issues, Unifor tabled proposals to limit or prohibit the contracting-out of bargaining unit work. United rejected those proposals and told Unifor that United had no intention to contract out the work of the bargaining unit employees. That representation was made by Richard Rozina for United on July 30, 2013 and then by Rich Veira on January 16, The contracting out announcement 9. On February 19, 2014, United informed Unifor s National Representative Leslie Dias of United s intention to make an announcement on the following day that would

6 Schedule A affect the work of its unionized employees at Toronto (and also in Calgary and in Vancouver where employees are represented by IAMAW). 10. On a conference call February 20, 2014, Unifor was provided with formal notice by United s representative Thomas Reardon, as Director of Labour Relations, of United s intention to contract out all of the work of its unionized employees at Pearson causing the lay-off and termination of 94 unionized employees. That letter is Document #3, attached. United offered to bargain with Unifor about the consideration to be provided to laid off employees. 11. Prior to February 19 and 20, 2014, United had said nothing to Unifor that suggested that a contracting-out of the work of Unifor-represented employees was being contemplated at all by United. In fact, United had explicitly assured Unifor during collective bargaining at least twice that no such contracting out was contemplated (see paragraph 8, above). 12. United provided to Unifor at the same time a document titled YYZ Sourcing Economics showing that contracting out of the work was forecast to save approximately $2.2 million annually for the performance of the work currently provided by Unifor-represented employees at a cost of $5.5 million annually. 13. At the same time, United gave notice pursuant to Part III of the Canada Labour Code to the Minister of Labour as required by the mass termination provisions of Part III. United also requested a waiver of the provisions of the Code that require the establishment of a joint planning committee in the event of a mass termination. That notice is Document #4 attached. 14. In the course of the same conference call, the employer delivered a proposal to Unifor concerning benefits and salary continuation severance pay. 15. Prior to a formal meeting to bargain about severance issues and about alternatives to the contracting-out of bargaining unit work as offered by United in its February 20,

7 Schedule A 2014 letter, Dias and Unifor Assistant to the president Bob Orr met with representatives of United in Chicago on February 25, At that meeting, United s VP of Labour Relations Jeffrey Wall represented to Unifor that United would accept a Unifor proposal to retain the work in-house as long as savings could be attained within 5 to 10% of the projected savings that United sought to attain but Wall could not or did not say with any certainty what real cost savings would satisfy United. 16. Unifor therefore undertook the task of preparing a proposal to United to achieve cost savings while retaining the work of the bargaining unit in-house and delivered those proposals to United in meetings on March 3 and 4, On March 6, 2014, United responded to Unifor with a calculation of the projected savings based on Unifor s proposals. On March 12, 2014, United provided a different calculation of the projected savings of the same proposals. Effectively, United was forcing Unifor to deal with a moving target of projected cost savings, from 40% to 45% and then to 50% of current labour costs. 18. In the course of the same post-announcement discussions, Unifor requested that United provide a justification or demonstration of how it arrived at its calculation of current wage costs of bargaining unit employees. United failed to do so fully, providing only partial justification by March 12, As of the date of filing of this application, United has rejected all reasonable proposals by Unifor for the continued performance of bargaining unit work by United s own employees.

8 Schedule B Schedule B Remedies Requested 1. CAW-Canada requests that the Board: a. Declare under Section 97 that the Respondent has contravened section 94(1)(a) and section 94(3)(a)(1) of the Code; b. Declare that the Respondent has contravened section 50(a) of the Code by failing to bargain in good faith and to make reasonable efforts to enter into a collective agreement; c. Order that the Respondent and any person acting on its behalf be required to discontinue the acts complained of; d. Order that the lay-off of bargaining unit employees be suspended until a date that is at least sixteen weeks from the date on which United provides a full explanation of its calculated current wage costs of bargaining unit employees and a full response and costing of the savings that would be obtained from Unifor s proposals, in order to provide Unifor and United with a full opportunity to consider all Unifor proposals for the continued employment by United of its existing employees; e. Order that the Respondent compensate Unifor and all employees for all losses; f. Order that the Respondent be required to give notice of any Order made by the Board to all affected employees; and g. Make any other Orders as the Board may deem appropriate in the circumstances.

9 Schedule C Schedule C List of Documents Filed with the Application (Attached) 1. Certificate issued by the Board Order U, (June 20, 2013) 2. Board Decision dated June 21, United letter to Unifor dated February 20, 2014 including two attachments 4. United letter to Minister of Labour dated February 20, Unifor conciliation request letter dated February 24, AFD\lc\cope343 G:\Legal\Files\United Airlines\ Contracting Out Toronto Work\ULP Application.doc