Lise Roy v. Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 8888
2791-00-U Lise Roy, Applicant v. Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 8888, Responding Party.
BEFORE: Christopher J. Albertyn, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 20, 2001
1This is an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c.1, as amended (“the Act”) in which the applicant claims that the responding trade union (“the union”) has violated section 74 of the Act.
2This application was filed on December 18, 2000. It was adjourned sine die by the Board, on the agreement of the parties, for a period of one year on February 7, 2001.
3Nothing transpired until the Registrar received a letter from the applicant dated October 19, 2001, requesting that the matter be instated for hearing. It appears the applicant did not copy that letter to the union.
4The Registrar has scheduled the matter for a consultation on January 3, 2002. The union has received notice of the consultation. It does not have a copy of the applicant’s letter of October 19, 2001 in which the applicant gives her reasons why she believes this matter should proceed. The applicant is directed forthwith to provide the union with a copy of her October 19, 2001 letter.
5The union wants the consultation to be adjourned. It explains the key individual it requires at the consultation will not be available. The union also asks that the application be dismissed for not disclosing a prima facie case, alternatively it wants better particulars to the applicant’s claim.
6The applicant is directed to provide the particulars sought by the union in its letter of November 19, 2001. Those particulars must be provided by November 30, 2001.
7The union should obtain the consent of the applicant to the proposed adjournment of the consultation.
8This panel is not seized.
“Christopher J. Albertyn”
for the Board