2109-00-G Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Applicant v. Aspen Drywall Inc., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair, and Board Members G. Pickell and A. Haward.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; October 30, 2000
This is a referral of a grievance to the Board for determination under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S. O. 1995, c. 1 as amended (the “Act”) in which the applicant seeks declaratory and other relief and requests that the Board determine the referral without a hearing if the responding party should fail to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate.
The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate and this matter came before the Board for determination. The applicant requests a declaration that the responding party is bound by the Residential Agreement between the Interior Systems Contractors Association of Ontario and Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation, Local 675. In support of that declaration the applicant states as a fact in item 2 of Part B, supporting facts: “The responding party is bound to the Interior Systems Contractors Association of Ontario”. The applicant does not even assert that the applicant is bound by a collective agreement to which the Interior Systems Contractors Association of Ontario is a party, although in paragraph 4 of the application the applicant asserts that there is a collective agreement between the applicant and the responding party.
The application does not identify the collective agreement which is alleged to be between the applicant and the responding party. Although it seeks a declaration that the applicant is bound by the residential agreement between the applicant and the Interior Systems Contractors Association, the applicant has not provided any factual allegation on which the Board could base such a declaration, such as a voluntary recognition agreement, a Board certificate or even a prior Board decision containing such a declaration.
Under the circumstances, the Board declines to issue the declarations and orders sought and directs that this matter proceed to hearing as scheduled on November 3, 2000 so that the applicant can provide the necessary evidence establishing that the responding party is bound by a collective agreement.
This panel of the Board is not seized with this matter.
“Harry Freedman”
for the Board