International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Locals 6, 7 and 25 v. Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada
1904-99-U International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Locals 6, 7 and 25, Applicants v. Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Jerry Coelho, Tom Oldham, Kerry Wilson, John Haggis and Luigi Scodellaro, Responding Parties v. IUBAC Locals 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 20, 23, 28, 29, and 31; Masonry Industry Employers’ Council of Ontario; Terrazzo, Tile and Marble Guild of Ontario Inc., Intervenors.
2532-98-U Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers and the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Locals 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 20, 23, 28, 29, and 31, Jerry Coelho and Tom Oldham, Applicants v. International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, John T. Joyce, John J. Flynn, Frank Stupar, and James Bowland, Responding Parties v. Terrazzo, Tile & Marble Guild of Ontario Inc., Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers on its own behalf and on behalf of all its affiliated Locals, and the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Locals 6, 7 and 25, Masonry Industry Employers’ Council of Ontario, Intervenors.
2736-00-R Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Applicant v. The Terrazzo, Tile and Marble Guild of Ontario Inc. and Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Responding Parties.
2737-00-R Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Applicant v. Masonry Industry Employers’ Council of Ontario and Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Responding Parties.
BEFORE: David A. McKee, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; May 30, 2001
The Board has received submissions from counsel for the Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (“OPC”) and the Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada (“BACU”) dated May 24, 2001. While not directly responsive to the submissions of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (“IUBAC”), they are sufficient for the Board to deal with the IUBAC’s request in its letter of May 18, 2001.
The OPC and the BACU have not complied with the direction of the Board set out in the decision of May 2, 2001. They indicate that they intend to seek an application for judicial review of that decision. That is, of course, their right and they are free to pursue that option. As counsel acknowledges, the filing of an application for judicial review does not operate to stay the effect of a decision of the Board. The Board does not treat such an application as an automatic stay of any ongoing proceedings before the Board, nor has any party asked the Board to stay its own decision. The Board’s direction remains unchanged, except as noted below. Although it should be unnecessary to repeat the direction, the Board directs the OPC and the BACU to comply with the directions set out in the decision of May 2, 2001.
In that decision, the Board directed the IUBAC to accept as members all persons who signified, on or before August 31, 2001, that they wished to become members of the IUBAC. That date was chosen in anticipation of compliance with the time limits set out in the Board’s decision with respect to the production of names and addresses. Within that framework, there would have been a clear period of three months during which persons affected could determine whether or not to exercise the option available to them. That is clearly not going to happen in the time now available. The Board is prepared at the request of any party to reconsider the May 2, 2001 decision to change that August 31, 2001 date to a later date once delivery of the Board’s Notice is possible, either through compliance with the decision or by an agreement of the parties.
“David A. McKee”
for the Board