Robert W. J. Taylor v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) et al.
File Nos.: 0720-00-U; 0891-00-U Applicant: Robert W. J. Taylor Responding Parties: National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 27; General Motors of Canada Limited, Diesel Division; Mike Freestone; Doug Griffiths; Sandy Davis; and Dr. McCabe
Before: Mary Ellen Cummings, Alternate Chair.
Decision of the Board: August 16, 2000
Decision
1These are unfair labour practice complaints filed against Mr. Taylor’s bargaining agent (the “CAW”) and his employer (“General Motors”).
2Although the applicant has filed volumes of material, the dispute today centres around his efforts to return to work in May 2000. Mr. Taylor had made previous complaints, which were resolved on May 16, 2000, with the assistance of a Labour Relations Officer, with an agreement that Mr. Taylor would present himself at the workplace for a determination about whether he was fit to return to work. Apparently, General Motors questioned his emotional and mental fitness to return to work. The CAW offered to file a grievance with respect to General Motors’ determination that Mr. Taylor was not fit to return to work, but Mr. Taylor declined. He wrote to the Board that he does not have any confidence in the CAW. In addition, Mr. Taylor does not have confidence in General Motors’ ability to fairly assess his mental or emotional health. And in any event, Mr. Taylor writes, it is unnecessary for General Motors to assess his mental and emotional health because he has already provided a report from his own psychiatrist.
3Finally, Mr. Taylor does not consider himself bound by the settlement reached May 16, 2000 because it violates his Constitutional and Charter Rights.
4Mr. Taylor misunderstands the role of the Board. It is not our mandate to step into disputes he has with his union or his employer because he does not like dealing with them or he does not trust them. Although Mr. Taylor has provided the Board with volumes of information, he has alleged no material facts that, if proved, would be a violation of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
5For these reasons, both of these applications are dismissed.
6Mr. Taylor seems to think he can behave as he wishes, sign settlements, then back out of them, and rely on his so-called Constitutional and Charter wishes to defend his conduct. Mr. Taylor could not be more wrong. He should instead focus on his obligations to his employer, as set out in the collective agreement. If in the course of meeting his obligations, he believes that General Motors is violating his rights under the collective agreement, Mr. Taylor should go to the CAW and discuss whether it is appropriate to file a grievance. That is the forum where the vast majority of legitimate workplace disputes are to be resolved.
7If Mr. Taylor continues to ignore both his employment obligations to GM, and the legitimate role of the CAW as bargaining agent to help resolve any disputes, Mr. Taylor will face consequences that no one, including the Board, will be able to rescue him from. In any event, for reasons set out above, there is no value to inquiring further into these complaints. They are dismissed.
“Mary Ellen Cummings”
for the Board