0163-01-R Tech Data Canada Inc., Applicant v. Teamsters Local Union No. 419, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Responding Party.
BEFORE: D. L. Gee, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 5, 2001
The Board is in receipt of a request for reconsideration of its decision dated July 19, 2001 from Tech Data Canada Inc. (“Tech Data”). Pursuant to the Board’s request, a response to the request for reconsideration was filed by Teamsters Local Union No. 419 (“Teamsters”) on October 1, 2001 and Tech Data filed a reply on October 22, 2001.
In dealing with this request for reconsideration, it is helpful to set out what the Teamsters and Tech Data argued at the hearing and what the Board in its decision of July 19, 2001 decided.
As the Board’s July 19, 2001 decision and paragraph 1 of the request for reconsideration indicates, Teamsters advised the Board at the commencement of the hearing that it intended to pursue an argument that the Board was without jurisdiction to grant relief pursuant to 69(6)(a) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”). Notwithstanding that no prior notice had been given by Teamsters of its intention to advance the jurisdictional argument, Tech Data did not request an adjournment or indicate in any way that it was not prepared to respond to the argument. Accordingly, the Board proceeded to hear the parties’ submissions.
Counsel for the Teamsters made her submissions concerning the Board lacking jurisdiction to hear the application on the basis that “the collective agreement” referred to in section 69(6)(a) of the Act was no longer in existence due to the fact that Tech Data and the Teamsters had entered into a renewal of “the collective agreement”. Counsel for Tech Data responded to such submissions. In the course of his submissions and in response to a query from counsel for the Teamsters, counsel for Tech Data stated that he was seeking a Board declaration pursuant to section 69(6)(a) of the Act. At no time did counsel make the expansive submissions contained in the request for reconsideration concerning subsections 69(6) (b), (c) and (d) of the Act.
Having regard to the fact that Tech Data stated it was seeking relief pursuant to section 69(6)(a) of the Act, the Board’s decision of July 19, 2001 considered whether, given the renewal agreement, the Board had jurisdiction to grant the relief requested. Numerous references throughout the decision (see paragraphs 8, 10, 14, and 15) clearly indicate that the Board’s analysis was based on Tech Data’s position that it was seeking a declaration pursuant to section 69(1)(a) and that the Teamsters took the position that the Board had no jurisdiction to grant such a declaration. The Board decided that, having regard to the fact that Tech Data and the Teamsters had entered into a renewal collective agreement, the Board no longer had the jurisdiction to declare that Tech Data
was no longer bound to the collective agreement in force at the time of the sale. The Board made no comment and clearly made no determination with respect to the Board’s jurisdiction to grant relief under any other subsection of section 69. There is nothing in the Board’s July 19, 2001 decision that precludes Tech Data from filing a further application in which it seeks relief other than that provided for in subsection 69(1)(a) of the Act.
- The test applied by the Board in the course of considering a request for reconsideration is amply set out in the response filed by the Teamsters. A reconsideration request is not an opportunity for a party to reargue a case or to present argument or case law that could have been presented in the original hearing. The argument Tech Data now seeks to make was not made at the original hearing and there is no reason why it could not have been. It is not appropriate to allow Tech Data to reargue its case by way of a reconsideration request. Accordingly, this request for reconsideration is hereby denied.
“D. L. Gee”
for the Board