- May 26, 2021
- Certifications/Decertifications
Background
This decision concerns an application for certification filed by IATSE, Local 210 for a unit of employees of the Bailey Theatre Society (the “Bailey Theatre”). In particular, the decision determines the employee status of Simon Williams. Mr. Williams was initially determined by the Board officer to be outside the bargaining unit. IATSE’s position was that Mr. Williams is within the scope of the bargaining unit. The Bailey Theatre’s position is that Mr. Williams is outside of the scope of the bargaining unit and in any event he is excluded because he performs managerial functions.
Mr. Williams began working for the Bailey Theatre in June of 2012. He was initially hired as program director, responsible for booking acts and developing programming for the theatre. However from the outset, he was involved in technical work for performances including assisting with the sound, rigging and lighting during performances. In 2013 Mr. Williams was given the title Assistant Manager. In that role, he kept the Theatre’s board informed of operational needs including staffing, purchases, staff training and budgetary concerns. He was also responsible for staff scheduling and with the approval of the Board hired students as casuals. In or around November 2014, The Bailey Theatre hired Mr. Douglas Roper as general manager. The Board found that over the weeks that followed the hiring of Mr. Roper, the managerial elements of Mr. Williams’ job ceased. In particular the Board found that he no longer had any meaningful decision making authority.
Decision
The Board found that the “assessment of an individual’s function is based on work performed at and around the time of the certification application”. The Board held that after November 2014, Mr. Williams had no managerial functions. While Mr. Williams still exhibited some supervisory functions such as ensuring that the technical crew knew when to attend work, ensuring that work was done properly and safely and reporting to the Employer about any equipment problems, staffing concerns or training that needed to be done, the Board found that these types of tasks are not sufficient to exclude Mr. Williams on the basis of managerial status.
With respect to Mr. Williams’ prime function, the Board found that Mr. William’s prime function centered around assisting and supervising the technical crew and therefore squarely within in the bargaining unit.
As a result, the Labour Board found that Mr. Williams is an employee within the scope of the bargaining unit.