Bryan Hisko v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association Local 47
3559-99-U Bryan Hisko, Applicant v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association Local 47, Responding Party v. Gorlan Mechanical Ltd., Intervenor.
BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Rundle and R. R Montague.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 30, 2000
This is an application brought pursuant to section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”) alleging that the responding party has breached section 74 of the Act.
In a letter dated November 23, 2000 counsel for the applicant requests the Board to produce:
Copies of the employment records of Brad Lapensee and Eric Lapensee from June 1, 1998 to December 31, 1998 and in particular the hours worked, the site where the work took place and the capacity they worked in i.e. foreman, journeyman.
Copies of the work record of Mr. Bryan Hisko from June 1, 1998 to June 30, 1998 and in particular the hours worked, the site where the work took place and the capacity he worked in.
Counsel for the employer in a letter dated November 27, 2000 opposes the above request for production.
In reply counsel for the applicant in a letter dated November 28, 2000 sets out reasons why such production is arguably relevant.
Having considered the correspondence on this issue the Board has determined that the material sought by the applicant is arguably relevant in this matter. The employer is therefore directed to produce to the applicant the information requested.
Other issues raised by counsel for the employer may be left to the panel conducting the DFR consultation on Thursday, January 11, 2001.
“Timothy W. Sargeant”
for the Board