3201-99-U Logiacco Nazareno, Applicant v. United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Marilyn Silverman, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; March 9, 2000
This is an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”) alleging a violation of section 74 of the Act.
Section 74 reads as follows:
A trade union or council of trade unions, so long as it continues to be entitled to represent employees in a bargaining unit, shall not act in a manner that is arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith in the representation of any of the employees in the unit, whether or not members of the trade union or of any constituent union of the council of trade unions, as the case may be.
The applicant states that he was involved in two work related accidents; in 1990 and 1996. The applicant’s allegations are that the responding party did not adequately represent him in a Worker’s Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) matter related to these accidents. As a result, the applicant retained his own representation and succeeded at a subsequent level of appeal before the Worker’s Safety and Appeal Tribunal (WSIAT). He now claims that the responding party pay the amount of the fee he paid to the consultant who ultimately represented him at his WSIAT hearing.
The responding party vehemently denies that it did not represent the applicant adequately and provides the Board with a detailed description of the various steps that it took in its pursuit of the applicant’s claim. Based on these, the responding party requests the application be dismissed. Further the responding party asserts that the responding party’s statutory duty under section 74 does not extend to representation in respect of WSIAT claims. It the context of this application I do not have to decide either of these points.
Assuming without deciding that the facts upon which the applicant relies are true, there is no obligation under section 74 for a trade union to provide representation of choice to the applicant. Unless there is some allegation that the applicant was treated in a manner that was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith, there is no relief available under section 74. Accordingly this application does not make out a prima facie case for any remedy.
This application is therefore dismissed.
“Marilyn Silverman”
for the Board