[1981] OLRB Rep. June 687
0852-79-M; 0853-79-U The Ironworkers District Council of Ontario and International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers Local Unions 700, 71, 736, 759, 765 and 786, Applicant, v. The Ontario Erectors Association and Ins-Co Sarnia Ltd., Respondents.
BEFORE: Ian C. A. Springate, Vice-Chairman, and Board Members D. B. Archer and J. A. Ronson.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; June 3, 1981
Counsel for the Ironworkers District Council of Ontario and International Association of Bridge Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers Local Union 700, 721, 736, 759, 765 and 786 has written to the Board requesting that it reconsider its decision of January 29, 1981 and re-list the matter for hearing. In support of this request counsel has made the following representations:
The decision of the Board is based upon a finding that Ironworkers, Local 700 had acted so as to lead Ins-Co to believe that the Ironworkers had authorized Blackwell to act on its behalf as a result of which Ins-Co entered into an agreement with Blackwell affecting the Ironworkers Local 700. There was no evidence before the Board (or cited in the Board's decision) to show that the Ironworkers had held out Blackwell as having authority to act on the Ironworkers behalf in concluding settlement of the 1 12a Referral except that both matters had been consolidated by the Board and one counsel was acting on behalf of the parties. The only holding out by the Ironworkers was through its common counsel who did not negotiate.
The Board in its decision ignored the commonly accepted principle that where parties to proceedings before a Court or administrative tribunal are represented by lawyers or attorneys negotiations for settlement of those proceedings must take place through those attorneys or lawyers in order to bind the principals. In this case, there was no evidence before the Board that Counsel for the Ironworkers and Blackwell participated in the settlement proceedings so as to bind the Ironworkers. In fact, the evidence was contra.
In these proceedings, Ironworkers, Local 700 was not the applicant alone in the referral under section 112a of the Act. The other applicants were the Ironworkers District Council of Ontario, Local 721, Local 736, Local 759, Local 765 and Local 786 all of the Ironworkers Unions. Accordingly, we must take it from the Board's decision that those applicants may still continue the Referral under Section 112a, and we would ask the Board to relist the matter for hearing with respect to those applicants.
In reaching its decision of January 29, 1981, the Board looked at a number of considerations other than those referred to in the first portion of counsel's letter. These considerations included the fact that Local 700 had authorized the Sarnia Building and Construction Trades Council to act on its behalf in the section 79 complaint in File No. 0853-79-U, as well a:; the interrelationship between the section 79 complaint and the various referrals under section 112a, including the referral of Local 700 in File No. 0852-79-M. These and the other considerations taken into account by the Board are referred to in some detail in paragraphs 16 through 19 of the Board's decision of January 29, 1981. We have reviewed these matters and, having done so, remain of the view that Local 700 is bound by the memorandum of settlement dated January 17, 1980. Accordingly, we are not prepared to vary or revoke the Board's decision of January 29, 1981 on the basis of the initial grounds raised in support of the request for reconsideration.
With respect to the second grounds put forward in support of the request for reconsideration, we are unaware of any principle to the effect that when a party to proceedings before an administrative tribunal is represented by counsel, any negotiations for settlement must take place through counsel in order to bind the principals. Further, no authorities have been advanced in support of such a principle. This being the case, we are not prepared to reconsider the Board's decision of January 29, 1981 on this basis.
We turn now to consider the submission that the Ironworkers District Council and the Ironworkers locals other than Local 700 can continue these proceedings. It is to be noted that the grievance giving rise to these proceedings, which is set out below, indicates that it was filed only on behalf of Local 700:
I am solicitor for Local 700 of the International Ironworkers in connection with the discharge on or about January 20th, 1979, by Ins-Co Sarnia Ltd. of the following grievors:
Clyde Ayers
Robert Farnsworth
John Forestell
William Haight
Tony Noyroski
Ronald Stratton Henry Warren
John Warren
Each of the grievors in the circumstances was wrongfully terminated and demands reinstatement with full compensation for all losses of earnings and other benefits. In this respect the union alleges violations of Articles 1, 24, 25, 26, among others, of the collective agreement between The Ontario Erectors Association and The Ironworkers District Council of Ontario.
I am instructed to advise you that the Union will refer this matter to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under Section 112a of The Labour Relations Act. If you wish to contact the Union with a view to settlement of these grievances, please contact Jim Harrower in Windsor (telephone 800-265-9532, toll free).
The grievance was referred to the Board in the name of The Ironworkers District Council of Ontario and International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers Local Unions 700, 721, 736, 759, 765 and 786, which is how the union party to the Ironworkers Provincial agreement is described in the agreement. However, the referral was signed as follows: "The Ironworkers District Council of Ontario and International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers Local Union 700, 721, 736, 759, 765 and 786, on behalf of Local Union 700 by their Solicitors, MacLean, Chercover".
Dealing firstly with the status of the other locals to continue these proceedings, it is common ground that the local of the International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers having jurisdiction in the Sarnia area is Local 700. All of the other locals have jurisdiction in other parts of the Province. Local 721 is based in Toronto, Local 736 in Hamilton, Local 759 in Thunder Bay, Local 765 in Ottawa, and Local 786 in Sudbury. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that none of the locals other than Local 700 hold the bargaining rights for employees of Ins-Co Sarnia Ltd. employed in the Sarnia area, and accordingly we are of the view that none of the other locals have standing to continue these proceedings.
There is nothing before us to indicate that the Ironworkers District Council of Ontario was ever certified to represent the employees of Ins-Co., and accordingly we can only assume that the representational rights for employees of the company are held by Local 700 and not directly by the Council. It is quite common for uncertified councils of trade unions to act as agents for their constituent unions. However, since in the instant case the Board has concluded that Local 700 is foreclosed from continuing the section 1 12a proceedings, it is clear that the Council cannot do so as the agent for the Local.
The remaining issue, then, is whether The Ironworkers District Council of Ontario, can on its own behalf and not as the agent of Local 700, continue the section 11 2a referral. On March 21, 1978, the Minister of Labour designated The District Council along with the International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers as the employee bargaining agency to represent in bargaining all ironworkers, except rodmen, represented by a number of affiliated bargaining agents, including Local 700, in the industrial, commercial and institutional sector of the construction industry. Although the effect of this designation was to vest in the District Council and the International Local 700's rights to conclude an agreement, it did not go so far as to vest in the Council and the International Local 700's rights and obligations insofar as they concern the handling of grievances. This point is made clear by section 130 of the Act which provides as follows:
Where an employee bargaining agency has been designated under section 127 or certified under section 128 to represent a provincial unit of affiliated bargaining agents, all rights, duties, and obligations under this Act of the affiliated bargaining agents for which it bargains shall vest in the employee bargaining agency, but only for the purpose of conducting bargaining and, subject to the ratification procedures of the employee bargaining agency, concluding a provincial agreement.
The grievance before us was a grievance filed against Ins-Co Sarnia Ltd. by Local 700, not by the Ironworkers District Council of Ontario. The grievance was referred to the Board on behalf' of Local 700. The rights, duties and obligations of Local 700 with respect to the grievance re main with Local 700, and have not been vested in the Council. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the Council does not have the status, on its own behalf, to continue the section 112a referral.
Having regard to the conclusions set out above, the Board declines to either vary or revoke its decision of January 29, 1981 or to re-list this matter for a continuation of hearing.