Ontario Labour Relations Board
1164-00-U Roland Greve, Applicant v. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Local 128, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 31, 2000
1The style of cause is hereby amended to reflect the correct name of the responding party trade union (“the union”) as indicated in its response: “International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Local 128”.
2This is an application under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c.1 (“the Act”).
3The union contends that the applicant has not pleaded a prima facie violation of section 74, and that, accordingly, the application should be dismissed without a hearing.
4Section 74 of the Act states:
- A trade union or council of trade unions, so long as it continues to be entitled to represent employees in a bargaining unit, shall not act in a manner that is arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith in the representation of any of the employees in the unit, whether or not members of the trade union or of any constituent union of the council of trade unions, as the case may be.
5Rule 46 of the Board’s Rules of Procedure states:
- Where the Board considers that an application does not make out a case for the orders or remedies requested, even if all of the facts stated in the application are assumed to be true, the Board may dismiss the application without a hearing or consultation. In its decision, the Board will set out its reasons.
6The application is very sparse in terms of setting out the material facts in support of an allegation that the union has acted in a manner that is arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith in its representation of the applicant. The applicant appears to allege that the union advised the applicant that he had no basis under the collective agreement to assert a claim against the employer. It appears that the applicant is not so much dissatisfied with the union’s response to his concern than he is with the fairness of the application of the collective agreement’s pension provisions to his circumstances. He characterizes his application in terms of “filing a grievance with the Labour Relations Board”. If that is indeed the substance and nature of the complaint, it does not amount to a violation of section 74.
7The applicant is directed to provide the Board and the union with a written statement of all the material facts upon which he relies to demonstrate that the union has acted in a manner which is arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. That written statement is to include what happened, where and when it happened, and the names of any persons said to have acted improperly. The written statement is to be provided to the Board and the union on or before September 12, 2000. To the extent the union wishes to file a reply or amend its response, having regard to the applicant’s written statement, it may do so on or before September 19, 2000.
8Following receipt of, or the deadline for, the receipt of the submissions referred to in paragraph 7 above, the Board shall decide whether to dismiss the application without a consultation, direct the filing of further submissions, or set the matter down for a consultation.
9I am seized to deal with the parties’ submissions.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board