3977-99-U Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada and its Local 321, Applicant v. Patricia Region Senior Services Inc. and The District of Kenora Home for the Aged Board of Management and/or Pinecrest Home, Responding Parties.
3979-99-R Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada and its Local 321, Applicant v. Patricia Region Senior Services Inc. and The District of Kenora Home for the Aged Board of Management and/or Pinecrest Home, Responding Parties v. Office & Professional Employees International Union and its Local 521, and Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 1072 and Ontario Nurses’ Association, Dryden General Hospital, Intervenors.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and H. Peacock.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 17, 2000
1Counsel for the responding party, Patricia Region Senior Services Inc., seeks an adjournment of the hearing scheduled for September 7, 2000 in these matters. The primary reason for the request arises from the scheduling of another Board matter on that date, a matter on which counsel is acting. Counsel also submitted that, given the distance the parties must travel, the hearing would be best scheduled over two consecutive days.
2A Labour Relations Officer canvassed all the parties and their counsel with respect to the possibility of re-scheduling the hearing for two consecutive days within a reasonable period after September 7, 2000. Perhaps not surprisingly, given the number of persons in this matter whose schedules must be considered, it was not possible to establish mutually acceptable alternative dates.
3Several of the parties in these matters oppose the adjournment request.
4In light of the opposition to his request for adjournment, the Board is of the view that a scheduling conflict involving this matter, which is not to be heard for several weeks hence, is not a sufficiently compelling reason to delay the hearing of these applications. This is so particularly where the applications involve many parties, any one of whose counsel might raise similar conflicts as a result of the scheduling of a new hearing commencement date.
5For these reasons, the Board must decline the request for adjournment of the hearing.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board