1896-98-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor.
1897-98-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor.
1898-98-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor.
2099-98-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor.
3482-98-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local No. 880, Intervenor.
3973-99-G Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089, Applicant v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, Responding Party v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Mary Ellen Cummings, Alternate Chair.
APPEARANCES: A.M. Minsky and Robert Leone for the applicant; Richard Drmaj and Doug Chalmers for the responding party; N.L Jesin and R. Carlton for the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256; no one appearing for Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local No. 880.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; April 28, 2000
- These files are referrals of grievances in the construction industry pursuant to section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995. Board File Nos. 1896-98-G;
1897-98-G; 1898-98-G and 2099-98-G are particularly aged, but all are chapters in the continuing saga of jurisdictional disputes between the Labourers and Carpenters in Board Area #2, and particularly, with Chalmers, with respect to scaffolding. A case management meeting among the parties and another panel of the Board about these and other similar referrals resulted in the "bundling" of these matters (called Group 3) before this panel of the Board for determination, in chronological order. Board File No.
3973-99-G is a new referral which the parties have agreed should also be part of the bundle before this panel.
A February 25, 1999 decision of the Board (differently constituted) determined that the Carpenters would have status to participate in the arbitration of File Nos. 1896-98-G; 1897-98-G; 1898-98-G and 2099-98-G. That panel also directed the applicant to provide particulars with respect to its claims in File Nos. 1896-98-G and 1897-98-G.
When the hearing convened on April 25, 2000, counsel suggested that an informal discussion could minimize the preliminary issues outstanding, and find a practical and efficient way to proceed. Those discussions were indeed, fruitful, and at the end of the day I made the following directions:
I. The Board will hear and determine the grievance referred in File No. 3973-99-G first.
- The parties are agreed that the events giving rise to this referral are the freshest, and so offer the best opportunity for a litigation based on recent, rather than ancient, events. This grievance, which relates to scaffold jobs at Imperial Oil, also encompasses a period of "shutdown" which gives an opportunity for the Board to hear about a wide range of scaffold jobs. It is also hoped that in proceeding first with this grievance, the Board can provide the parties with some directions about particulars and the type of evidence that will be helpful to it in deciding the other grievances.
II. The Carpenters will have status to participate in the hearing into File No.
3973-99-G. The Carpenters will not participate in the hearings into File No.
1896-98-G; 1897-98-G; 1898-99-G; 2099-98-G and 3482-98-G, even though they were granted status with respect to the first four.
- The Carpenters want to participate in the first cases that will interpret and apply the jurisdictional dispute decision in Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, [1998] OLRB Rep. July 594. Indeed, as counsel for the Carpenters pointed out, the Board's February 25, 1999 decision granting them standing in the first four files, recognized that the Carpenters' participation in grievances that were about implementing the Board's jurisdictional dispute decision was desirable as a means to resolve the parties' differences. However, in a decision of the Board relating to other grievances involving these same parties, dated April 13, 2000, at the request of the Labourers, the Board denied standing to participate to the Carpenters with respect to "new" grievances. That panel decided that the Carpenters continued participation was unnecessary, resulted in longer and slower hearings, and was not appropriate in what was essentially a dispute about whether Chalmers had breached its collective bargaining obligations to the Labourers. The Board also noted in that decision that by the time that hearing commenced, the Carpenters would have participated in a number of grievances interpreting and applying the Board's jurisdictional dispute decision. The Carpenters are prepared to accept the spirit of those decisions, and seek to participate only in whatever is the "first" grievance that proceeds to hearing before this panel. Ultimately, I determined that the Carpenters would participate in the hearing into File No. 3973-99-G even though it is a "new" referral, because the parties have agreed that it makes sense, for other reasons, to proceed with it first. However, the Carpenters will not participate in the hearings into File Nos. 1896-98-G; 1897-98-G; 1898-99-G; 2099-98-G and 3482-98-G, even though they were granted status with respect to the first four. Counsel for the Carpenters reserves his right to seek to participate in any new referrals.
III. Chalmers is content with the particulars that have been filed with respect to File No. 3973-99-G.
- As I set out earlier, the process of adjudicating this grievance will hopefully help the Board to guide the parties about particulars and relevant evidence in the other referrals.
IV. The referral in File No. 3973-99-G concerns tending carpenters at scaffold at Imperial Oil, Plants #1 and #2 from February 7, 2000 and continuing, but the parties have, sensibly, agreed to limit both the amount of evidence and the time period that will be covered by this grievance.
Essentially, this grievance concerns scaffold jobs at Imperial Oil, Plants #1 and #2 from February 7, 2000 to the end of the present round of "shutdowns" occurring there. While on the one hand, the parties agree that "shutdowns" offer a unique opportunity for the Board to hear about a variety of scaffold jobs, on the other hand, the supporting documentation that Chalmers would have to gather to meet the whole of the Labourers' production request is enormous, with all the attendant costs, in both money and resources. Chalmers has already provided documentation about jobs to April 1, 2000. I have directed Chalmers to provide documentation with respect to three weeks work in each of the Lubes (Plant #1) and A&V (Plant #2) shutdowns. Chalmers will provide the documentation in stages, with the last being provided by June 7, 2000. I am satisfied that this information, combined with what Chalmers has already provided, will give the parties and the Board a fair representation of the range of work. The "limits" on the amount of information Chalmers is to provide is not intended to restrict the remedial range of this grievance. As already set out, this grievance embraces scaffold jobs at Imperial Oil, Plants #1 and #2 from February 7, 2000 to the end of the present round of "shutdowns" occurring there.
The parties have requested that further dates be set, and the Registrar's office will be in contact with counsel to make those arrangements. In the meantime, all parties and the Board are considering Chalmers' suggestion that the Board take a view at some appropriate time.
“Mary Ellen Cummings”
for the Board