International Woodworkers of America v. Marks Lumber Ltd.
Citation: [1986] OLRB Rep. July 1004 File No.: 0064-86-U Complainant: International Woodworkers of America Respondent: Marks Lumber Ltd.
Before: Judge R. S. Abella, Chairman, and Board Members W. G. Donnelly and C. Ballentine.
Appearances: David I. Bloom, Roman Stoykewych, William Pointon for the complainant; A. P. Tarasuk, F. Marks for the respondent.
Decision of the Board; July 7, 1986
1This complaint alleges a violation of the respondent of sections 3, 15, 64, 66, 67, and 70 of the Labour Relations Act. Included in the relief claimed by the applicant are the following remedial requests:
Schedule "A"
A direction that the respondent return to the bargaining table and remove its proposal for preferential seniority for those employees who never went on strike or who abandoned the strike.
An order that the respondent maintain the method of operation and staffing levels in place prior to the strike for the duration of any collective agreement, which is ultimately reached or if no agreement is reached, for a period of two years from the commencement of the strike.
and in the alternative
- An order directing that any of all layoffs be on the basis of seniority and that employees terminated due to lack of work be paid severance pay of one week per year of service.
2The application was filed on April 7, 1986 and the hearing was scheduled for June 10, 1986. On June 4, 1986, A.P. Tarasuk, on behalf of the respondent, wrote to the Registrar stating, among other things, "... it is the Respondent's position that the relief claimed in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of Schedule "A" could affect the rights of employees who returned to work prior to this date. In our respectful submission, all such employees should be served notice of the hearing and given the opportunity to appear on their own behalf." On June 6, 1986, 4 days before the scheduled hearing date, the Registrar received the names and addresses of 25 employees who are continuing to work during a lawful strike which commenced on March 11, 1986.
3At the commencement of the hearing, Tarasuk requested an adjournment so that the 25 employees referred to in the letter received by the Board on June 6 could be served with notice of the proceedings. The applicant union opposed the adjournment. After hearing argument, the Board denied the respondent's request.
4The Board's previous jurisprudence has been to refuse to give notice or party standing in circumstances such as these. (See Timothy W. Smith and William Morton v. Toronto Joint Board Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, Local 1414J v. Group of Employees [1984] OLRB Rep. Aug. 1133; International Chemical Workers, Local 159 v. Kodak Canada Ltd. [1977] OLRB Rep. Aug. 517; and Ontario Sheet Metal Workers Conference v. Ontario Hydro [1986] OLRB Rep. May 663). The facts in this case are distinguishable from those in *Re Hoogendoorn and Greening Metal Products & Screening Equipment Co. et al* (1968), 1967 CanLII 20 (SCC), 65 D.L.R. (2d) 641 (S.C.C.) and in *Re Bradley et al and Ottawa Professional Firefighters Association et al* (1967), 1967 CanLII 160 (ON CA), 63 D.L.R. (2d) 376 (Ont. C.A.). In both of those cases, the employees were held to have a sufficiently direct interest to be entitled to status as parties. In the circumstances of this case, we find the interests of the 25 employees to be incidental to the main issues before us and no more directly affected than those of other employees whose working relationship may to some extent be affected by remedial orders in unfair labour practice disputes. The essential dispute in this case is one of bargaining between an employer and a union certified to represent the interests of bargaining unit employees. It would not be appropriate routinely to grant notice in section 89 complaints to all employees whose interests are incidentally or potentially affected by the outcome since neither their rights nor conduct are centrally in issue in the proceedings.
5For all of the above reasons, the respondent's request for an adjournment is denied.