University of Guelph v. Janette Smiderle and Ministry of Labour
1232-00-ES University of Guelph, Applicant v. Janette Smiderle and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
Employment Practices Branch File No. 61004894
BEFORE: John Morgan Lewis, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 30, 2000
1This is an application under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.14, as amended (the “Act”) for review of Order to Pay No. 61004894.
2The applicant made a timely application for review and made the requisite payment to the Director in trust as required by section 68(7) of the Act. The applicant, by letter dated August 29, 2000, advised the Board that the claimant and the applicant had entered into minutes of settlement in respect of a complaint filed under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19, as amended. A copy of the minutes of settlement were not provided to the Board. The applicant, in its August 29, 2000 letter, advises that the applicant was withdrawing its application for review and requested the return of the monies paid in trust to the Director.
3The August 29, 2000 correspondence was copied to counsel for the claimant. It would appear, therefore, that the claimant is in agreement with the applicant with respect to the withdrawal of the application for review and the returning of the monies held in trust to the applicant. However, the claimant and the applicant are not the only parties to this proceeding. In addition to those two parties, the Employment Standards Officer who issued the Order to Pay and the Ministry of Labour are also parties to this proceeding (see section 68(9) of the Act), and are entitled, if they so desire, to oppose the application for review despite the apparent agreement of the claimant to withdraw its claim against the applicant (which is the result of withdrawing the application for review and returning the monies held in trust to the applicant).
4Having considered the decision of the Board in Equifax Canada Inc. (unreported decision dated February 21, 2000, Board File No. 3048-99-ES) which dealt with a similar situation, the Board is of the view that this matter be dealt with in writing to determine whether any party is opposed to having the application withdrawn and the monies held in trust by the Director be returned to the applicant.
5Accordingly, the Board directs the parties to this application to advise the Board on or before September 18, 2000 whether they consent to the Board allowing the withdrawal of the application for review and directing the return to the applicant of the entire payment it had made in trust to the Director. If the Board does not receive any submissions on or before September 18, 2000, it will assume that the parties have consented to the Board allowing the withdrawal and directing the Director to return to the applicant the monies paid in trust. If a party objects to the Board making such an order, it must advise the Board and the other parties of its objection and the grounds for the objection on or before September 18, 2000.
6This panel of the Board remains seized with this matter.
“John Morgan Lewis”
for the Board