Dianne L. Haskett

During a hearing into complaints of arbitrary and discriminatory hiring hall referrals, the complainants sought leave to cross-examine their own witness.

They argued she was a hostile witness and relied on section 23 of the Evidence Act due to alleged inconsistencies between her examination-in-chief and cross-examination.

The Board denied the request, finding no factual or legal basis to declare the witness hostile.

The Board also held that section 23 of the Evidence Act was inapplicable because the alleged inconsistent statements were made during the witness's present testimony before the Board, not 'at some other time' as required by the statute.

Three complainants alleged that the respondent union and its business agent breached the Labour Relations Act regarding hiring hall referrals.

The respondents raised preliminary objections that the complaints should be dismissed due to undue delay in filing.

The Board found that one complainant (Marinaro) had delayed, but the delay was partly due to the union's refusal to provide access to hiring hall records and his attempts to use internal union procedures.

The Board allowed his complaint to proceed, noting any prejudice could be addressed in remedy.

Another complainant (Countryman) failed to exercise due diligence in checking his status on the out-of-work list for over a year; his complaint was dismissed for unreasonable delay.