Supervisors at Calgary International Airport Eligible for Collective Bargaining

Order No.: 12150-U IN THE MATTER OF THE Canada Labour Code - and - International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, applicant, - and - [COMPANY]., Calgary, Alberta, employer. WHEREAS the Canada Industrial Relations Board (the Board) has received an application for certification pursuant to section 24(1) of the Canada Labour Code (the Code ) from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (the applicant) seeking certification as bargaining agent for a [NAME] of employees of [COMPANY]. (the employer); AND WHEREAS the applicant proposes the following description for the bargaining [NAME]: all employees working as supervisors that work at the Calgary International Airport at [ADDRESS], Calgary Alberta. AND WHEREAS , following a meeting organized by the Board’s [NAME] with the applicant and the employer, the applicant proposed the following amended description for the proposed bargaining [NAME]: all employees employed as supervisors with [COMPANY]. at Calgary International Airport. AND WHEREAS the employer does not oppose the bargaining [NAME] description as proposed by the applicant, if the application is granted; AND WHEREAS the employer argues that the application should be dismissed on the basis that the proposed [NAME] is not appropriate for collective bargaining because all supervisors proposed for inclusion in the [NAME] exercise management functions and/or are employed in a confidential capacity in matters relating to industrial relations and are therefore excluded from the definition of “employee” under section 3(1) of the Code ; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that supervisors routinely handle confidential labour relations information, including accommodation plans, workplace violence and harassment complaints, grievances, disciplinary records, strategic correspondence and sensitive employee data, manage time-off and overtime requests and play a substantive role in shaping the employer’s labour relations strategy by preparing grievance responses and providing disciplinary recommendations; AND WHEREAS the employer asserts that supervisors share common supervisory duties across the six classifications identified in the application, with additional supervisory responsibilities varying by classification; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that the collective agreement confers certain responsibilities related to the grievance process on the ramp supervisors and, in particular, that article 16.02 requires that complaints first be discussed with the appropriate supervisor, who must interpret agreement provisions, assess workplace conduct and represent the employer’s position in early dispute resolution; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that two supervisors must sit on the [NAME] as representatives of the employer; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that placing supervisors in another bargaining [NAME], particularly one represented by the applicant, would create a conflict of interest and harm labour relations; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that all supervisors are expected to be key participants and oversee the disciplinary process but currently have different levels of skill and proficiency in disciplinary matters and that, thus, not all supervisors are assigned independent oversight over disciplinary matters; AND WHEREAS the employer submits that it is engaged in a training plan and that its intention is that, once its training plan is completed, all supervisors will be proficient in and able to independently administer disciplinary functions from beginning to end; AND WHEREAS the applicant maintains that the proposed bargaining [NAME] is appropriate and that supervisors are employees without managerial authority, lacking independent decision-making in the issuance of discipline; AND WHEREAS the applicant submits that there is no conflict of interest and that the supervisors will bargain separately, with any issues to be resolved through bargaining; AND WHEREAS the employer questions the veracity of the membership evidence submitted by the applicant and requests that the Board conduct a thorough investigation; AND WHEREAS the applicant maintains that the membership evidence is accurate and includes the required payment; AND WHEREAS the employer opposes the applicant’s additional submission in response to the [NAME]’s letter of understanding dated September 11, 2025; AND WHEREAS the Registrar provided both parties with an additional opportunity to file submissions following the employer’s objection, and the Board therefore finds that there is no prejudice to the parties in its acceptance of the applicant’s additional submission in response to the [NAME]’s letter of understanding dated September 11, 2025; AND WHEREAS the employer requests a hearing; AND WHEREAS section 16.1 of the Code provides that the Board may decide any matter before it without holding an oral hearing and, having reviewed all of the material on file, the Board is satisfied that the documentation before it is sufficient for it to determine this matter without an oral hearing; AND WHEREAS the Board considers exclusions as they relate to the duties of a position and not to the incumbent of the position, only considers current duties when deciding whether to exclude a position from a bargaining [NAME] and does not rely on the employer’s future plans or anticipated responsibilities (see Greater Moncton Airport Authority Inc ., 1999 [NAME] 20); AND WHEREAS the Board was presented with documentary evidence, specifically job descriptions for each of the supervisor roles included in the proposed bargaining [NAME], a copy of the ramp agent collective agreement and various disciplinary reports and letters prepared or signed by supervisors; AND WHEREAS , after considering the evidence and the parties’ submissions, the Board finds that while some supervisors do play an active role in a management process or provide effective recommendations with respect to some of their functions, the evidence of their current duties has not established that they clearly have a power to decide or that they exercise significant independent decision-making authority in hiring, disciplining or dismissing employees; AND WHEREAS , after considering the evidence and the parties’ submissions, the Board acknowledges that the ramp supervisors have a limited role outlined in the ramp agent collective agreement related to the grievance procedure but notes that the evidence does not establish that the ramp supervisors exercise management functions, such as having the authority to independently deny or allow grievances, and their responsibilities under the ramp agent collective agreement do not create an inherent conflict of interest; AND WHEREAS , having considered the parties’ submissions and the narrow interpretation applied to exclusions due to confidential capacity (see [COMPANY] (Port Dover Branch)  (1977), 21 di 439; [1977] 2 Can LRBR 126; and 77 CLLC 16,090 (CLRB no. 91)), the Board is not persuaded that the tasks of the supervisors meet the test for confidential exclusion from a bargaining [NAME] where there is no evidence that the supervisors are involved with [NAME], collective bargaining or other activities related to the employer’s labour relations strategies as a regular part of their duties or that they have more than occasional contact with information related to industrial relations; AND WHEREAS , following consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Board is not convinced that a separate [NAME] of supervisors represented by the same bargaining agent would create a conflict of interest and, on the contrary, is of the view that a separate [NAME] would help insulate against any potential conflict of interest; AND WHEREAS , following consideration of the submissions of the parties concerned, the Board is also not convinced that two supervisors’ participation in the [NAME] on behalf of the employer is sufficient to conclude that these supervisors are exercising management functions or that this creates an inherent conflict of interest; AND WHEREAS , following consideration of the parties’ submissions and its discretion pursuant to section 27(5) of the Code , the Board has determined that the [NAME] described hereunder is appropriate for collective bargaining; AND WHEREAS , following investigation of the membership evidence, the Board is satisfied that there are no irregularities and that a majority of the employees of the employer in the [NAME] wish to have the applicant trade union represent them as their bargaining agent. NOW, THEREFORE , it is ordered by the Canada Industrial Relations Board that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers be, and it is hereby certified to be, the bargaining agent for a [NAME] comprising: all employees employed as supervisors with [COMPANY]. at the Calgary International Airport. ISSUED at Ottawa, this 20th day of January, 2026, by the Canada Industrial Relations Board. [NAME]-Chairperson Reference: File No. 038968-C