1506-00-R United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Unions 628 and 800, Applicant v. R.L.P. Mechanical Ltd., R.L.P. Machine and Steel Fabrication Inc., Spectrum Construction, 910609 Ontario Inc. c.o.b. Columbia Chrome, Cloutier’s Machine Shop Limited, Responding Parties.
1507-00-R International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Local 128, Applicant v. R.L.P. Mechanical Ltd., R.L.P. Machine & Steel Fabrication Inc., Spectrum Construction, 910609 Ontario Inc. c.o.b. Columbia Chrome, Cloutier’s Machine Shop Limited, Responding Parties.
1508-00-G United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Unions 628 and 800, Applicant v. R.L.P. Mechanical Ltd., R.L.P. Machine & Steel Fabrication Inc., Spectrum Construction, 910609 Ontario Inc. c.o.b. Columbia Chrome, Cloutier’s Machine Shop Limited, Responding Parties.
BEFORE: David A. McKee, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; November 27, 2001
The Board is in receipt of correspondence from counsel for the applicant dated November 21, 2001. It was brought to me late on November 26, 2001. No response has been received from the responding parties to the contents of this letter.
If the facts asserted by the applicant in its correspondence are correct, this is a serious matter. The timetable set by the Board in its decision of October 29, 2001, was rather tight given the limited time available. However, the timetable was set in consultation with counsel and did allow enough time to produce documents. Further, the decision set out how disputes over the production of documents were to be resolved in order to enable the parties to adhere to the schedule. At this point, it is obvious that the timetable may well not be adhered to in a fashion which will permit the Board to proceed with these applications on December 13, 2001 as anticipated.
Absent a response form the responding parties, I assume the facts set out in the applicant’s letter to be true. Accordingly, I direct the parties to comply with the orders set out in the decision of October 29, 2001 as follows: Paragraph 9, forthwith; Paragraph 10, 3 working days after compliance; Paragraph 11, 3 calendar days (excluding Sundays) after receipt of a letter from counsel for the applicant; Paragraph 12, at any time before or on December 13, 2001.
The hearing scheduled for December 13, 2001 will proceed. The responding parties are directed to appear with counsel, if they choose, but in any event, with one representative from each of the responding parties who is able to speak to any and all issues with respect to the production of documents in this proceeding. It may be possible to start the proceedings, and parties should be prepared to do so. If the responding parties have any submissions in response to the letter of November 21,2001 (although one would have expected them to respond by now), they may do so at any time. However, the timetable, as modified by this decision, must be observed.
I am seized of these matters.
“David A. McKee”
for the Board