2958-98-R Shell Canada Limited, Applicant v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and its Locals and Affiliates, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Mary Ellen Cummings, Alternate Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; June 19, 2000
This is an application pursuant to section 127.2(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). Shell Canada Limited seeks a declaration that it is a “non-construction” employer under the Act.
Counsel for the responding party wants to review Shell’s Sarnia refinery. Shell Canada Limited has denied that request. I directed that both parties provide submissions. Although both parties provided case law and relied on the principles that have been applied to the question of whether or not a decision-maker ought to “take a view”, that is not what I am being asked; I am being asked to require Shell Canada Limited to permit and accompany counsel for the Carpenters on a tour of the refinery, so that counsel can put the evidence he has heard into context. It is an extraordinary request.
I have already decided, after hearing argument, that it was unnecessary for me to take a view. I doubt that I have the jurisdiction to require Shell Canada Limited to permit counsel for the Carpenters to tour its premises. And even if I did have the jurisdiction, I would not make such an order.
Counsel for the applicant has requested that the Board sit on the scheduled days of August 1 and 2, 2000 “for whatever additional time is necessary to conclude this case”.
The Board will not so agree. I will assist the parties to continue their efforts to make good use of the hearing time. I will also agree to set a reasonable period beyond the usual hearing time if it appears possible to complete the matter, without rushing either counsel through their submissions.
“Mary Ellen Cummings”
for the Board