Ontario Labour Relations Board
1010-00-U David Campbell Johnson, Applicant v. Kingston Independent Nylon Workers Union, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; July 28, 2000
Decision
1This is an application brought pursuant to section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”) alleging that the responding party has breached section 74 of the Act.
2Without dealing with all the specifics of the application, the applicant was terminated by Dupont Canada at the Kingston site by letter dated December 10, 1998. At the time the applicant was incarcerated for an incident which the applicant alleges was dismissed (the applicant alleges such dismissal occurred in “June of this year”). The application was filed with the Board on June 20, 2000. In essence the application alleges the responding party did not act appropriately on the applicant’s behalf in relation to his termination and was in breach of section 74 of the Act.
3As a preliminary issue counsel for the respondent seeks a ruling that this application should be dismissed as being untimely. Counsel points out the letter of termination was dated December 9, 1998 more than 1-1/2 years ago. The applicant further submits “the only explanation for this unwarranted and unjustifiable delay appears that the Applicant may have been incarcerated until January 28, 1999 – more than seventeen months ago. To the extent that the Applicant has particularized any contact with the Union whatsoever, he alleges (and which the Union denies) unreturned telephone calls on January 28th, February 5th and 19th, 1999 – all of which are more than sixteen months prior to any application or complaint be made”.
4Though the Board may dismiss an application without a hearing, the Board is not prepared to dismiss this application at this time. This ruling is without prejudice to the respondent’s right to argue this preliminary issue in any subsequent proceeding before this Board.
5The respondent and Dupont Canada are given an extension of 10 days from the date of this decision to file a response and an intervention in this matter respectively.
“Timothy W. Sargeant”
for the Board