Ontario Labour Relations Board
File No.: 3080-00-U Date: June 6, 2001
Between: Christopher York, Applicant v. Graphic Communications International Union, Local 100M, Responding Party v. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, Intervenor.
Before: Anthony Brown, Vice-Chair.
Decision of the Board
1This is an application pursuant to section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the "Act") alleging violation of section 74.
2The Board permitted the applicant to file an amended application. The Board also ordered the applicant to provide certain further particulars. The applicant provided particulars in a letter dated May 7, 2001. The responding party and intervenor filed their respective responses to the applicant’s amended application. The applicant filed a reply on June 1, 2001. By letter dated June 4, 2001, the responding party objects to the filing of a reply.
3A number of concerns have been raised by the responding party or intervenor about whether a consultation or hearing should be scheduled in this matter at all, or at this particular time. For example, the responding party mentions an on-going criminal charge against a union representative alleged to harbour unfriendly feelings toward the applicant. There is also an issue of whether the applicant should have pursued his internal remedies through the union executive hierarchy. It is further alleged that the applicant’s sick leave grievance has been resolved. The applicant, on the other hand, maintains that he continues to be harassed at work and that the union continues to unfairly represent him.
4In my view, the reply filed by the applicant is primarily an attempt to clarify the applicant’s position on the outstanding issues. To that extent, it may assist the other parties in knowing the extent to which the applicant disputes the response and intervention. It contains a number of attachments which may be pertinent, as well. Therefore, the Board declines to strike the reply.
5The Registrar is directed to schedule this application for a consultation.
6If criminal charges are still outstanding at the time of the consultation, the implications of having two on-going proceedings can be raised before the panel of the Board hearing this application.
7I am not seized.
8The matter is referred to the Registrar.
"Anthony Brown" for the Board