Don Park Inc. v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local Union No. 285
File No.: 3227-00-R Date: December 13, 2001 Ontario Labour Relations Board
Applicant: Don Park Inc. Responding Party: Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local Union No. 285 Intervenor: Ontario Sheet Metal Workers and Roofers’ Conference
Before: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair, and Board Members G. Pickell and G. McMenemy.
Appearances: Scott T. Williams, Stan Meek and Jack Van Beurden for the applicant; Bernard Fishbein, Louie Petricca and Angelo Bozzato for the responding party; Jerry Raso and Andrew Scanlon for the intervenor.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1This is an application under section 127.2 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c. 1, as am. for a declaration terminating the bargaining rights of the responding party in respect of certain employees of the applicant. The Ontario Sheet Metal Workers and Roofers’ Conference (the “Conference”) sought to intervene in this proceeding. The applicant opposed the Conference having standing while the responding party supported the Conference’s request. Following the submissions of the parties, the Board made the following oral ruling:
The applicant seeks a declaration terminating the bargaining rights of the responding party in respect of the applicant’s “off-site” custom fabrication work destined for residential building projects. The Ontario Sheet Metal Workers and Roofers’ Conference (the “Conference”) seeks to intervene in this application on the grounds that it (and Local 30 of the Conference) hold bargaining rights in respect of the applicant’s “off-site” custom fabrication work destined for building projects in the industrial, commercial and institutional sector of the construction industry. The applicant opposes the intervention on the grounds that the Conference does not have standing in this application.
The applicant does not seek a decision terminating the bargaining rights of Local 30 or the Conference. On that basis, the applicant argues that the only interest the Conference has is an indirect one, analogous to the interests of the party seeking to intervene before the Court of Appeal in Schofield v. Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, (1980), 1980 CanLII 1726 (ON CA), 28 O.R. (2d) 764 (C.A.). That is, the Conference wants to make submissions in this case because of the precedential value this decision might have.
The applicant also submits that a finding about the applicant’s status in this case is only effective as between it and the responding party. A finding that the applicant is a non-construction employer is not an in rem determination since the Board should resist making those sorts of determinations and relies on Oakwood Park Lodge, [1980] OLRB Rep. Oct. 1501.
It is by no means clear to us that the Conference has a right to participate since we accept that a finding in this case about