2192-00-G Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183, Applicant v. Walter & SCI Construction and/or Walter & SCI Construction (Canada) Ltd., Responding Party.
BEFORE: John Morgan Lewis, Vice-Chair, and Board Members G. Pickell and A. Haward.
APPEARANCES: Mark Lewis, Rocco DiGiovanni, Jack Oliveira and Thomas Durmody for the applicant; Daniel Leone, Brian Foote, Denis Cote and Tony Micelli for the responding party.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 21, 2000
1This application is a referral of a grievance to arbitration pursuant to section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”).
2The applicant, Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 (“the union”) alleges that the responding party, Walter & SCI Construction and/or Walter & SCI Construction (Canada) Ltd. (referred to as “the company”) violated Article 6 of the collective agreement between the Heavy Construction Association of Toronto and the union effective from May 1, 1998 to April 30, 2001 (the “collective agreement”).
3The alleged violation of Article 6 of the collective agreement arises from the termination of Thomas Durmody (“Durmody”) on October 16, 2000. The company terminated Durmody for drinking on the job. The union denies that Durmody had been drinking on the job and therefore claims that Durmody was discharged without just cause. The union seeks, inter alia, the immediate reinstatement of Durmody without any loss of wages, benefits and seniority.
4As this matter involves a discharge of an employee, expediency in determining the merits of the grievance is important. Due to scheduling difficulties, the panel of the Board will not be able to issue a fully reasoned decision until early January of 2001. In such circumstances the Board finds it appropriate to issue a bottom line decision in this matter at this time with reasons to follow in January 2001.
5The Board’s bottom line decision in this matter is as follows:
Durmody was discharged for consuming alcohol on the job site on October 16, 2000. The company never attempted to amend the grounds for discharge. The company has not discharged its evidentiary burden and has failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that Durmody consumed alcohol on the job site. Accordingly, the grievance is hereby upheld. The Board directs the company to reinstate Durmody forthwith.
The parties have requested the opportunity to address the issue of compensation for Durmody in the event the Board upheld his grievance. Accordingly, we make no other orders or directions in this matter at this time. We remain seized to deal with any remedial issue should the parties be unable to fashion an appropriate remedy by themselves.
“John Morgan Lewis”
for the Board