Byron R. Green v. Canadian Auto Workers Union Local #222 and C.A.W. National Union
Parties
2889-99-U Byron R. Green, Applicant v. Canadian Auto Workers Union Local #222 and C.A.W. National Union, Responding Party v. General Motors of Canada Limited, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Laura Trachuk, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; December 1 , 2000
Decision
1The Board has now considered the submissions it received from the applicant pursuant to its decision of November 6, 2000. After reviewing the submissions and the other materials filed in this matter the Board has decided not to reconsider its decision of September 15, 2000.
2Section 96(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 provides that the Board has the following broad remedies for a complaint of this nature:
- (4) Where a labour relations officer is unable to effect a settlement of the matter complained of or where the Board in its discretion considers it advisable to dispense with an inquiry by a labour relations officer, the Board may inquire into the complaint of a contravention of this Act and where the Board is satisfied that an employer, employers' organization, trade union, council of trade unions, person or employee has acted contrary to this Act it shall determine what, if anything, the employer, employers' organization, trade union, council of trade unions, person or employee shall do or refrain from doing with respect thereto and such determination, without limiting the generality of the foregoing may include, despite the provisions of any collective agreement, any one or more of,
(a) an order directing the employer, employers' organization, trade union, council of trade unions, employee or other person to cease doing the act or acts complained of;
(b) an order directing the employer, employers' organization, trade union, council of trade unions, employee or other person to rectify the act or acts complained of; or
(c) an order to reinstate in employment or hire the person or employee concerned, with or without compensation, or to compensate instead of hiring or reinstatement for loss of earnings or other employment benefits in an amount that may be assessed by the Board against the employer, employers' organization, trade union, council of trade unions, employee or other person jointly or severally.
3The Board may therefore direct the parties to do whatever it considers necessary to remedy violations of the Act. A party who attends the hearing is given the opportunity to make submissions as to how the Board should exercise its very broad discretion. However, a party which chooses not to attend the hearing forgoes that opportunity. The Board’s Notice of Consultation which was sent to each party states the following in capital letters: IF YOU DO NOT ATTEND THE CONSULTATION, THE BOARD MAY DECIDE THE APPLICATION WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING ANY DOCUMENT FILED BY YOU. The responding party therefore had clear notice of the effect of not attending the hearing.
4The applicant did refer to the prior grievances in his application and the intervenor referred to them in its intervention. The Board’s remedy was directed to all of the violations of the Act alleged by the applicant at the consultation. The Board does not require an applicant to use any magic words when complaining that he or she has been not been represented by his or her trade union in the manner required by the Act. The Board will therefore not reconsider its decision and the request for reconsideration is dismissed.
“Laura Trachuk”
for the Board