J. Tarbutt

The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act, seeking a determination that there was an established local area work practice of its members performing the cutting and placing of lagging within its geographic jurisdiction.

The Board acted as the committee provided for under the provincial agreement to determine the work practice.

After reviewing the evidence of lagging work on industrial and commercial construction sites, the Board found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that contractors bound to the agreement had recognized the union's claim to the work.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the respondent employed non-union workers without referral slips.

At the hearing, the respondent argued the applicant should be restricted to the grievance as filed and precluded from raising interpretation issues not explicitly pleaded.

The Board ruled that a grievance need only particularize the factual allegations and reference the relevant collective agreement provisions, and the respondent is not entitled to particulars of the applicant's legal theory.

The matter was adjourned to be heard alongside a related grievance.