Ontario Labour Relations Board
2918-00-ES Expense Reduction Analysts International Canada Inc., Applicant v. Angeli Anand and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
Employment Practices Branch File No. 43002865
BEFORE: John Morgan Lewis, Vice‑Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; October 29, 2001
Reasons for Decision
1The Board is in receipt of a request for reconsideration filed by the applicant dated September 7, 2001 December 11, 1999, of the Board’s decision dated August 16, 2001.
2Section 21.2(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, as amended (the “SPPA”) provides the Board with the power to reconsider its decisions. Section 21.2(1) reads as follows:
21.2(1) A tribunal may, if it considers it advisable, review all or part of its own decision or order, in accordance with its rules made under section 25.1, and may confirm, vary, suspend or cancel the decision or order.
3Rules 94-96 of the Board’s Rules of Procedure provide for the reconsideration of a Board decision and are adopted by reference in Rule 107 to applications under the Employment Standards Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. E.14, as amended (the “Act”).
4Pursuant to section 21.2(1) of the SPPA, the Board has a broad discretion to reconsider any decision or order made by it and to vary or revoke any such decision or order. However, the Board has repeatedly indicated that it will not reconsider its decision unless there are good reasons for doing so. This approach furthers the interest of finality in Board decision-making and, in practical terms, discourages parties from seeking to delay the implementation of Board orders. The Board has been prepared to reconsider an earlier decision or order where that decision contains an obvious error; where the request raises important policy issues which have not been adequately addressed; where new evidence is sought to be presented which could not, with the exercise of due diligence, have been obtained and presented previously and which could, if accepted, make a difference to the decision; and, where representations are sought to be made which the party had no previous opportunity to make.
5The applicant’s request for reconsideration does not raise any issues, which could arguably fall within any of these categories and does not otherwise provide a basis for reconsideration. Without suggesting that all of the legal and factual assertions contained in the request were made at the hearing, the essence of the request is an attempt to reargue the case.
6Having reviewed the applicant’s submissions, the Board is not persuaded to reconsider its decision of August 16, 2001. This application for reconsideration is hereby denied.
“John Morgan Lewis”
for the Board