On September 10, 2013, the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) issued its long-awaited ruling on the status of the Collective Agreement that was negotiated between Dynamex Kelowna and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers. On April 4, 2012, the parties signed off on the terms of a collective agreement. The tentative agreement was subsequently ratified by the members of the Dynamex bargaining unit on July 13, 2012. Following the ratification of the collective agreement, a dispute arose regarding the Letter of Understanding that was intended to provide remuneration as a resolution to pending complaints relating to vacation and holiday pay, as defined by the Canada Labour Code, Employment Insurance Act and Canada Pension Act. The dispute arose because the Letter of Understanding, as drafted by Dynamex, went well outside the scope of what was agreed to during the process of negotiations and actually contemplated the potential future offloading of Employer liabilities to the members of the Dynamex bargaining unit.
On September 27, 2012, the Union submitted a complaint to the CIRB, alleging a violation of section 94 (1) of the Canada Labour Code. In its complaint, the Union argued that the Collective Agreement was in full force and effect and that any issues arising from the wording of the release form drafted by Dynamex could be resolved through arbitration, if required. In response, Dynamex argued that the Collective Agreement could not be in effect until such a time as the terms of the release were mutually agreed upon. In its decision dated September 10, 2013, the Board held that the Collective Agreement was in effect and that the dispute over the scope and format of the release document is an issue that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of an arbitrator:
The Board is of the view that the current difference of opinion over the release under the LOU is a matter involving the interpretation, application and alleged contravention of the collective agreement. Accordingly, pursuant to section 57(1) and section 60 (1) of the Code, it is a matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of an arbitrator. Stated another way, the difference of opinion over the wording and scope of the release is not a matter that is within the jurisdiction of this Board to address or resolve.
As a result of the Board’s ruling, the Union will now file a grievance to resolve the issue of the terms of remuneration. In the meantime, the Collective Agreement between Dynamex Kelowna and CUPW is in full force and effect!
In Solidarity,
Ken Mooney – Regional Grievance Officer
Amended Sept. 11, 2013 cope 225