Ontario Labour Relations Board
0599-01-ES Ron Crawford, Applicant v. Sponsorship & Licensing Management Inc., James Benson, Employment Standards Officer and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
Employment Practices Branch File No. 30014979
BEFORE: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair.
APPEARANCES: No one appearing for the applicant; no one appearing for Sponsorship & Licensing Management Inc.; Laurie Eisenberg appearing for James Benson and the Ministry of Labour.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; October 12, 2001
1This is an application for review under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E. 14, as am. of the refusal by Employment Standards Officer James Benson to issue an order to pay. The Registrar advised the parties that the hearing in this matter had been rescheduled to Friday October 12, 2001 at 9:30 a.m. after the Board had, by decision dated August 22, 2001, adjourned the hearing on that day when both the applicant and Sponsorship & Licensing Management Inc. (the “employer”) had failed to appear at the scheduled hearing. That decision noted that the applicant had requested an adjournment of that hearing and had been advised that he needed the consent of all parties. There is nothing to suggest that the parties did not receive notice of the rescheduled hearing set for today.
2Although the hearing was scheduled to commence at 9:30 a.m. and counsel for the Employment Standards Officer and the Ministry of Labour of Labour was present, the Board waited until after 10 a.m. to see if the applicant or the employer would appear. The hearing convened shortly after 10 a.m.
3Counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer advised me that the applicant was aware of the rescheduled hearing because the applicant had phoned counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer earlier this week to advise her that he wanted an adjournment. Counsel submitted that she advised the applicant that the request for the adjournment had to be made to the Board as it was the Board that would determine whether to grant an adjournment. She also stated that she advised the applicant to obtain the consent of the employer to his requested adjournment. The Board heard nothing from the applicant in connection with this matter since receiving the applicant’s request dated August 14th that he wanted an adjournment of the August 22nd hearing.
4The applicant had been advised by the Registrar in a letter dated August 17, 2001, acknowledging receipt of the applicant’s August 14th letter that a party seeking an adjournment must obtain the consent of all parties to the proceeding or that such request must be made before the panel hearing the matter. Apparently, counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer advised the applicant of the same thing when they spoke on October 10, 2001, two days prior to the hearing before me.
5Counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer requested that the application for review be dismissed as the applicant did not attend. The applicant had ample notice of the hearing and did nothing to contact the Board to request that the hearing be adjourned. The Board proceeded with the hearing with only counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer in attendance. The original notice of hearing the applicant received stated in capital letters that if he did not attend the hearing the Board may decide the application without further notice to him. Although the applicant did not attend the first hearing that had been scheduled, counsel advised me that she had asked the Board at that time to adjourn the hearing to allow the applicant another opportunity to attend. Although not obliged to do so, the Board provided the applicant with notice of the rescheduled hearing. The applicant has seen fit neither to attend the rescheduled hearing nor to contact the Board to request a further adjournment and the other parties to obtain their consent to another adjournment.
6Under the circumstances, having regard to the request of counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Employment Standards Officer, and to the applicant’s failure to attend the hearing to pursue his application for review of the Officer’s refusal to issue an order to pay, the Board acceded to counsel’s request and dismissed the application at the hearing.
Disposition
7This application for review is dismissed.
“Harry Freedman”
for the Board