3355-99-U Joaquim Anceriz, Applicant v. United Steelworkers of America, Responding Party v. Alcan Aluminium Limited, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Christopher J. Albertyn, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 22, 2000
This is an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c.1, as amended (“the Act”) in which the applicant claims that the responding trade union (“the union”) has violated section 74 of the Act.
The applicant was terminated from employment on November 17, 1995. The union filed a grievance on March 25, 1996. The application was filed on February 16, 2000, nearly four years after the union withdrew the grievance. The applicant has been given an opportunity by the Board to explain the long delay in bringing this application.
The applicant’s explanation for the delay is that he was not aware that he could bring an application under section 74 of the Act against the union. That explanation - ignorance of an entitlement under the Act - is not accepted by the Board as sufficient to justify delay, particularly a delay of the duration in this case. Complaints should be brought in a timely manner so that the relevant information available to all concerned is relatively fresh and accessible. When complaints to the Board are delayed unnecessarily, or for an extended period of time, recollections of past events fade and reliable information of what actually happened is difficult, if not impossible, to retrieve. Complainants who are not aware of all of their legal remedies are assumed to be able to inform themselves of their rights and remedies by seeking appropriate advice, unless they are prevented in some manner beyond their control from doing so. That is not the case here. The applicant should have apprised himself of his legal rights and remedies at an early stage after he became aware, during 1996, that the union was not pursuing his grievance. Were this matter to proceed now, the prejudice to the other parties occasioned by the delay in the applicant’s pursuit of his complaint would be significant. The application should not proceed further. It is dismissed.
“Christopher J. Albertyn”
for the Board