Ontario Labour Relations Board
File No.: 0838-00-HS Date: November 17, 2000
Between: Kathy Adams Izzard, Applicant v. General Motors of Canada Limited, and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
Before: David A. McKee, Vice-Chair.
Decision of the Board
1This is an application for a review of an order of an Occupational Health and Safety Inspector pursuant to section 61 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990 ch O-1 ("the Act"). The responding party General Motors of Canada Limited has filed a response in which it asks that this application be dismissed without a hearing. Similarly, the Ministry of Labour has asked that this application be dismissed on the basis that the application seeks remedies that the Board cannot grant, even if all of the facts contained in the application are true.
2Rule 10 under the Act provides as follows:
- Where the Board is satisfied that a case can be decided on the basis of the material before it, and having regard to the need for expedition, the Board may decide any matter under section 61 of the OHSA without an oral hearing.
3The applicant is directed to respond by way of written submissions to the motion made by the responding party and the Ministry of Labour on or before 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, November 29, 2000. For the purposes of such a motion, the Board will assume that all of the facts pleaded in the application are true. That is, there is no need to persuade the Board that the applicant was injured, that the accident was preventable, that supervisory staff were notified of the potential danger, and that they failed to take the appropriate steps to ensure that a dangerous situation could have been avoided.
4The Board would like the applicant to respond to all of the assertions made by the responding party, particularly its assertions that this complaint should have been made to the Ministry earlier, that this is just an attempt to get around the difficulties of using the grievance procedure, and that the inspector's order was reasonable in light of the length of time between the incident and the complaint to the Ministry. As well, the Board directs the applicant to set out exactly what she would like the Board to order the Ministry and the responding party to do, and in so doing to respond to the Ministry's objections that the Board cannot in fact order the responding party or the inspector to do any of the things the applicant seeks to have them do.
5The applicant is directed to deliver a copy of her submissions to the responding party and the Ministry at the same time as they are filed with the Board. However, since this is a request to dismiss the application without a hearing, and in light of the December 12, 2000 hearing date, the Board will not require or consider reply submissions from the responding party or the Ministry. The Board will render its decision as soon as possible after submissions are received from the applicant. The applicant should be aware that the Board does have the power to cancel the hearing and determine the application on the basis of the material in the file. Accordingly, her submissions should be as complete as possible.
"David A. McKee"
for the Board