0313-00-U David S. Courtney, Applicant v. The Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, Responding Party v. Peel District South Board, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Christopher J. Albertyn, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; October 10, 2000
This is an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c.1, as amended (“the Act”) in which the applicant claims that the responding trade union (“the union”) has violated section 74 of the Act.
The union has sought the dismissal of the application. The applicant was suspended for one day and transferred from the school at which he was teaching to another. He complains that the union has not represented him properly in challenging his suspension and the transfer. There is much else in the applicant’s submissions which amplify his dissatisfaction with the employer’s action against him, and the union’s actions in dealing with his grievance.
The union’s counsel has informed the Board that the union has pursued the applicant’s grievance concerning his suspension and transfer through the grievance procedure and it has now referred the grievance to arbitration. I issued a decision on August 22, 2000 enabling the applicant to respond to this information, and, assuming its correctness, I suggested there might be no good reason for the application to continue, given that the likely outcome, if the applicant were successful, would be referral of the applicant’s grievance to arbitration.
The applicant has responded. He takes issue with my characterization of his complaint, but, other than to contend that he has not been informed of any aspect of the arbitration to take place, he does not seem to dispute the fact of the union’s referral of the grievance to arbitration. The applicant should, of course, be kept informed of the steps being taken by the union to have the grievance heard by an arbitrator.
In the circumstances there is no good reason why this matter should be referred to a consultation or a hearing at this stage. It will be adjourned sine die for a period not exceeding one year. If within that year for some reason the applicant’s grievance is not dealt with at arbitration he will be entitled to revive this application on written notice to the Board and to the other parties. Should the application not be revived within the period, it will be deemed to be withdrawn.
“Christopher J. Albertyn”
for the Board