3603-99-G Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Applicant v. Metro Railing Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Laura Trachuk, Vice-Chair, and Board Members G. Pickell and A. Haward.
APPEARANCES: Mike McCreary and Lister Tennant for the applicant; Karen Cosgrove, David Conn, Domenic Donato, and Peter Donata for the responding party.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 30, 2000
1This is a grievance referral pursuant to section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). At the hearing scheduled for March 29, 2000, the Board made a number of preliminary rulings.
2The Board ruled that it would permit the responding party to file its response and to pay its hearing fee approximately 20 to 40 minutes after 9:30 a.m., the time required in the Board’s Rules of Procedure. The Board considered it appropriate to exercise its discretion to permit the late filing because a meeting with the Labour Relations Officer had been scheduled for 9:00 a.m. in the morning prior to the hearing and there had been some confusion in getting the parties together for that meeting.
3The Board also denied an objection made by the responding party that the grievances included with the referral could not be referred pursuant to section 133 of the Act because they relate to employees in a non-construction bargaining unit. In denying the motion, the Board relied on its established jurisprudence as set out in Ideal Railings Limited, [1990] OLRB Rep. Dec. 1284. Section 133 applies to collective agreements between employers, as defined in the construction industry provisions, and trade unions, also as defined in the construction industry provisions. Therefore, in situations such as these in which a construction union and a construction employer have grievances arising out of a collective agreement between them, they may be referred pursuant to section 133 even if they pertain to non-construction employees.
4The responding party’s response was filed the morning of the hearing which is what the Board’s rules required. However, the response contains a number of objections about which the union had no notice and to which it could not respond without an opportunity to prepare. The Board therefore agreed to adjourn the hearing and directed the parties to exchange particulars with respect to the response according to the following time table:
a) the responding party will provide the applicant with particulars of the matters set out in its response on or before 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, April 5, 2000;
b) the union will provide its reply to the responding party on or before 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 12, 2000.
5Both parties should also provide copies of their materials to the Board.
6This matter is referred to the Registrar to set a further hearing date. This panel is not seized.
“Laura Trachuk”
for the Board