0831-01-ES Miriam Finbow, Applicant v. Bradik Telemarketing Services Inc., Ivy Jones, Employment Standards Officer and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.

Employment Practices Branch File No. 30-015434

BEFORE: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair.

DECISION OF THE BOARD; July 26, 2001

1The applicant filed an Application for Review (Form A-69) in which it states that she wishes to make an application under the Employment Standards Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E. 14, as am. (the “Act”) for review of an order to pay. The applicant indicates in her application that the Employment Standards Officer did not obtain all of the money due her. It appears from the material filed that, following further communication with the Employment Standards Officer, the Officer contacted Bradik Telemarketing Services Inc. (“Bradik”) and as a result, Bradik agreed with the applicant’s claim for an additional payment of $100.00. It appears that the Officer obtained a cheque for that amount from Bradik and forwarded it to the applicant.

2The applicant subsequently advised the Board that she has received the payment she had requested, but she did not indicate that she has withdrawn this application for review. It appears that the Employment Standards Officer never issued an order to pay. Under the Act, if there has been an order to pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer, the Board may, upon an application, review the order and determine whether it had been issued properly. The applicant acknowledges that the Officer has obtained the additional amount that she says in her application for review she should have received. As no order to pay was issued, and as the applicant has not sought to review a refusal to issue an order (as there has not been a refusal either), there is no issue over which the Board has jurisdiction.

3Simply put, there is no order to pay that was issued under the Act and there was no refusal to issue an order. The applicant has obtained the amount that she was claiming. Therefore there is nothing for the Board to review in this application for review.

DISPOSITION

4This application for review is dismissed.

“Harry Freedman”

for the Board