[1983] OLRB Rep. August 1361
1017-83-M Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Applicant, v. Royal Ontario Museum, Respondent
BEFORE: M. G. Mitchnick, Vice-Chairman, and Board Members F. W. Murray and B. L. Armstrong.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 31, 1983
This is an application under section 106(2) of the Labour Relations Act requesting the Board to determine whether the “new position created by the employer - Exhibit Project Co‑ordinator - is covered by the collective agreement”.
The Board would note initially that the question which it determines under section 106(2) of the Act is whether a person is an "employee" for the purposes of the Act. The answer to this question may have the effect of resolving any dispute between the parties as to whether or not the position is also covered by the collective agreement, but it need not necessarily do so. Compare, for example, Nelson Crushed Stone, [1980] OLRB Rep. Oct. 1500.
Beyond this, the respondent employer points out that the new position in question is only now at the stage of being advertised and interviewed for, and that no person has yet, or may ever, be selected to fill the position.
The Board finds the present application to be premature. Section 106(2) of the Act speaks of a "person", and not of a "position". It is only the status of a particular individual, therefore, which technically can be in dispute under the section. The Board noted in the Corporation of the City of Barrie, [1983] OLRB Rep. Aug. 1239, that evidence of extensive practice in a new position is not essential in every case for the Board to make a determination under section 106(2). However, the actual individual in dispute must at least be able to testify before the Board as to his or her ongoing role in the organization, and to the extent of the authority which he or she understands that he or she has been given. There is at the present time no “person” in dispute, nor individual to give the Board such evidence.
The application at this time is dismissed.