W. McNaught, M. Bertoia and J. Mullins v. Toronto Transit Commission et al.
0648-99-HS W. McNaught, M. Bertoia and J. Mullins Worker Committee Members, Danforth Joint Health & Safety Committee, Applicants v. Toronto Transit Commission, and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
4155-98-HS W, McNaught, M. Bertoia and J. Mullins, Applicants v. Toronto Transit Commission, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113, Ministry of Labour, and Inspector Chris Bandara, Responding Parties.
BEFORE: M. A. Nairn, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; April 17, 2001
1By letters dated March 5, 2001 and March 12, 2001, the Toronto Transit Commission and the Ministry of Labour, respectively, requested that these matters be dismissed, or in the alternative, that they be stayed pending the disposition of the application filed in Board File No. 3297-99-OH (the “reprisal complaint”). I requested submissions from the applicants and reply from the responding parties. I have now received and reviewed those submissions.
2In their submissions those responding parties raise plausible arguments as to why these matters ought not to proceed. Those arguments go to both institutional and policy concerns that might inform the exercise of the Board’s discretion. Those responding parties are also asking, at a minimum, to delay this process on the basis of a litigation contingency (the outcome of the reprisal complaint). In its submissions the Ministry refers to the position of the remaining institutional workplace party, the union. However the union has not directly offered its views on the issues raised by the recent requests by the other responding parties.
3At the same time, these matters are scheduled to continue on April 23, 2001 for three consecutive days. Considerable evidence has already been heard and it is anticipated that the matters can be completed within the time currently scheduled. These hearing dates have been set for some time and were scheduled only after the Board had to adjourn earlier scheduled dates.
4In all of the circumstances, I am of the view that it is more appropriate to finish hearing the parties’ evidence and to reserve any determination based on the issues raised most recently. Argument may be addressed on these points at the conclusion of the case along with argument on the merits.
5In addition, the Toronto Transit Commission is hereby directed to immediately provide to the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113 a copy of its submissions dated March 5, 2001 and April 3, 2001 and a copy of the applicants’ submission dated March 21, 2001 (the Ministry of Labour appears to have forwarded its submissions to the union already). The Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113 is hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, in respect of the issues raised by the TTC and the Ministry in these recent submissions, by no later than Thursday, April 26, 2001 with a copy to the applicants and responding parties at the same time. If further opportunity is required to respond to those submissions by the other parties, that will be provided.
6This matter will continue on April 23, 2001. A copy of this decision is to be forwarded to the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113.
“M. A. Nairn”
for the Board