Gary Spracklin v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113
File No.: 2541-98-U Date: January 20, 2000
Gary Spracklin, Applicant v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113, Responding Party.
Before: Christopher J. Albertyn, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1This is an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (‘the Act’) alleging a violation of section 74 of the Act by the responding trade union (‘the union’).
2By decision on December 2, 1999 I invited the parties to make representations as to whether this matter should be re-listed for hearing. Representations have been received from the applicant and from the Toronto Transit Commission (‘the employer’).
3I have considered the representations. The choice is whether to dismiss the application and have the applicant file a fresh application with his allegations concerning the conduct of his arbitration by the union, or whether to allow the applicant to amend his particulars in this matter, and have it proceed. If the application were now dismissed and a new application filed, there would be some unnecessary duplication of allegations by the parties. Overall, I think it less onerous on all concerned if the applicant is permitted to amend his existing application and the union and the employer have an opportunity to file amended responses.
4The applicant must file his amended particulars by January 28, 2000. The union should file its amended response by February 11, 2000 and the employer may file its intervention also by February 11, 2000.
“Christopher J. Albertyn”
for the Board