The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada v. Honeywell Limited
File No.: 3477-99-G Applicant: The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada Responding Party: Honeywell Limited
BEFORE: M. A. Nairn, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. G. Knight and G. McMenemy.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 3, 2000
1This is a referral of a grievance in the construction industry brought pursuant to section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). The applicant delivered the referral and accompanying material to the responding party. Confirmation of that delivery was provided by the Registrar of the Board dated February 29, 2000, confirming that the time for filing a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate (Form A-87) was not later than 5 (working) days from the date of that notice. Thus the time for filing the Form A-87 in this case is no later than March 7, 2000. By letter dated March 2, 2000 the applicant has written advising the Board that the parties have agreed to extend the time for the responding party to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate until March 17, 2000. The applicant has requested in its referral that the Board determine the referral without a hearing and based only on the material filed by it, should there be a failure to file a timely Form A-87.
2It is not immediately apparent to the panel that an applicant has the opportunity to relieve a responding party from the requirements of Rule 158 and the requirement to pay the filing fee at the same time (Rules 144 and 145). The consequence for failing to file that Form A-87 is that the Board will proceed to determine the matter by way of “default” proceedings. Even where a hearing is required by the applicant, the Board may refuse to allow a responding party to participate, notwithstanding a willingness by the responding party, at some later point, to file the appropriate form and pay the attendant fees.
3While the Board is certainly not interested in creating technical roadblocks for the parties to these proceedings, it is, at the same time, necessary to give clear structure to these Rules where the consequences may be to disentitle a responding party from participating at all, with attendant liability flowing. It strikes us that the preferable response in these circumstances is for the applicant to withdraw its request to have the matter proceed by way of a default proceeding in the absence of the Form A-87 being filed in a timely way. That alleviates any potential confusion as to the appropriate responsibilities of the responding party and addresses both parties’ apparent interest in allowing the responding party some further opportunity to respond.
4The applicant is directed to provide its position to the Board and to the responding party no later than Monday, March 6, 2000 in order that the responding party may then respond accordingly and in a timely way.
“M. A. Nairn”
for the Board