1899-01-U Kathryn Anne John, Applicant v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Responding Party v. St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, Intervenor.
BEFORE: Patrick Kelly, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 14, 2001
This is an application alleging that the responding party (“the union”) failed the applicant in its duty of fair representation codified in section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 as amended (“the Act”).
Both the union and the intervenor (“the employer”) contend in their filed responses that the application fails to disclose a prima facie case of a violation of section 74, that is, even if the applicant’s allegations are true and provable, they would not constitute a breach of the Act. They seek the dismissal of the application without a hearing or consultation.
Before dealing with the motions of the union and the employer, it would be helpful to the Board to consider the applicant’s position in relation to a number of material facts alleged by the union in its response. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to provide to the Board and to the other parties written submissions indicating whether or not she agrees with each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37 and 38 of Schedule A: Material Facts enclosed with the union’s filed response in this matter. If the applicant disagrees with any of those allegations, she must indicate why she disagrees. If the applicant does not disagree with any particular allegation, she shall be deemed to agree with it. The applicant’s written submissions are to be provided on or before November 29, 2001.
Following the deadline for receipt of the submissions herein directed, the Board shall give further consideration to the motions of the union and the employer, as described in paragraph 2 above.
“Patrick Kelly”
for the Board