Ontario Labour Relations Board
[1990] OLRB Rep. December 1313
1600-90-R United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union 463, Applicant v. P.H. Atlantic Plumbing & Heating Division of 629629 Ontario Limited, Respondent
BEFORE: Louisa M. Davie, Vice-Chair, and Board Members W. N. Fraser and I. Kurchak.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 7, 1990
The name of the respondent is amended to read: "P.H. Atlantic Plumbing & Heating Division of 629629 Ontario Limited".
The Board has received a request to reconsider its decision dated October 9, 1990. That request is made by counsel for the respondent in a letter dated November 8, 1990. It was opposed by the applicant in a letter dated November 21, 1990. The Board does not propose to set out the lengthy submissions received from both parties.
The substance of the submissions supporting the request for reconsideration is based on the fact that the respondent asserts that it did not receive timely notice of the application for certification and was therefore unable to prepare a timely reply or provide proper notice to employees who might be affected by the application.
The respondent through its counsel asserts that it did not receive from the Board Forms
77, 78, 74, 81, Schedules to Form 77 and the notice entitled "Notice to Employees" ("the appropriate documentation") until October 1, 1990. It is further asserted that this documentation was not "brought to the attention of management until October 2, the terminal date". As a result, the notices were not posted until October 2, 1990 and were then only posted "in the shop located at its [the respondent's] head office" because "... there was no opportunity to post at the various construction sites in the province at which employees were working ...".
The respondent did not file a timely reply and schedules, and did not return Form 74, the Return of Posting Card. Counsel for the respondent in his letter to the Board states that the respondent posted the notices on October 2, 1990 and mailed the Return of Posting Card. The Board notes that it has not received any Return of Posting Card from the respondent. The Board further notes that it did not receive a reply from the respondent or a list of employees until it received this reply for reconsideration on November 9, 1990.
We note that at the time of our decision dated October 9, 1990, this panel of the Board had received a duly completed "advice of posting" card, from the applicant. On that card Mr. Larry Cann, a representative of the applicant states that he had "ascertained from employees affected by this application that the Notices to Employees (Form 78) were posted by the employer on September 27, 1990." We also note that the records of the Board indicate that the appropriate documentation was sent to the respondent at its proper address at 3206 Wharton Way, Mississauga, Ontario by Quick Messenger Service (Ontario) Ltd. on September 25, 1990 and was received at that address on that day as evidenced by a signature on the consignee portion of the receipt bill.
On October 9, 1990, the Board therefore dealt with the application on the basis of the evidence before it and without a hearing pursuant to section 102(14) of the Labour Relations Act.
In its request for reconsideration the respondent asserts that at the time we made our decision the facts were not as indicated in paragraph 6 herein. The respondent asserts it received the documentation from the Board on October 1, 1990 and not September 25, 1990 as indicated by the Quick Messenger Service receipt, and asserts that the notices were posted on October 2, 1990 and not September 27, 1990 as indicated on the advice of posting card returned by the applicant.
Under these circumstances the Board directs that this matter be listed for hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to hear the evidence and representations of the parties in respect of the matters raised in the request for reconsideration.