HomeMy WebLinkAbout2386-02-U - Mrowinski 04-04-06
Mrowinski v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2004 CanLII 28061 (ON L.R.B.)
Page 1 01'2
Ontario >> Ontario Labour Relations Board >>
This document: 2004 CanU! 28061 (ON L.R-B.)
Citation: Mrowinski v Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2004 CanLll 28061 (ON L R.B )
Date: 2004-0406
Docket: 289202-U
2892-02-U .Janet Mrowinski, Applicant v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU),
Responding Party v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community, Family &
Children' s Services), Intervenor.
BEFORE: Timothy W. Sargeant, Vice. Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; April 6, 2004
L
This is a request for reconsideration of the Board's decision dated March 4, 2004.
2.
In SUppOlt of this request, the application for reconsideration states:
The Union (OPSEU) failed to represent the grievor, her I.Iuman Rights has not been
respected. The Union as the culprit of the discrimination lost the right to a Joint Retainer
Representation according to the Rules of Professional Conduct Rule #2.04, if an disputes [sic]
develops the Joint Retainer has to withdraw. ...
Also on file are two letters dated March 15,2004 and March 30, 2004.
3. For a request for reconsideration to be successful, it must raise compelling submissions
which could not reasonably have been advanced earlier. It is not an opportunity to re-litigate the matter.
In the Board's opinion, this request for reconsideration does not raise any new submissions that could not
reasonably have been advanced earlier. The request for reconsideration and the letters merely reiterate
prior submissions of the applicant already considered by the Board. The applicant obviously does not like
the decision of the Board and is attempting to re-argue the matter. This is not a proper ground for
reconsideration. As the Board stated in K-Mart Canada Limited (Peterborough), [1981] OLRB Rep. Feb.
] 85 at paragraph 4:
To avoid abuse of the reconsideration provision and bring some finality to its adjudicated
decisions the Board has adopted principles not unlike those of the courts. The Board will not
normally accede to a request to reconsider unless the party requesting reconsideration intends
to adduce new evidence which was not previously available to them by the exercise of due
diligence, and then only where such additional evidence, if proved, would be likely to make a
substantia] difference to the outcome of the cases. Reconsideration is therefore generally
restricted to allowing a party to adduce evidence or make representations which it did not have
a previous opportunity to raise. The Board may also consider such factors as the motives for
the request for reconsideration in light of a party's conduct, and the resulting prejudice to
another party if the case is reopened. (See, generally International Nickel Company of
Canada, 63 C.L.L.e. ] 6,284; The Detroit River Construction Limited, 63 e.L.L.e. para.
]6,260; National Steel Car Corporation Limited, [] 966] OLRB Rep. ApI. 55; Canadian Union
http://www.canlii.org/ on/cas/ onlrb/2004/2004onlrb 12054 .html
10/3/2005
Mrowinski v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2004 CanLII 28061 (ON L.R.B.)
Page 20f2
of General Employees, [1975] OLRB Rep. Apc 320; York University, [1976] OLRB Rep. Apc
187 affirmed, sub. Nom. Jordan v. Ontario Labour Relations Board, York University Faculty
Association, York University, 78 c.L.L.c. para. 14,132 (Ont. Div. Ct.).
4. Further, it is to be noted that in its decision dated March 4, 2004 the Board pointed out that
the decision ofthe Grievance Settlement Board is not a decision this Board has the authority to overturn.
5. For all ofthe above reasons, the request for reconsideration is denied.
"Timothy W. Sargeant"
the
Board
[APOqt C(lnlJI] [Conditions Of Use] [Advi3ngec:l seargh] Ute1p] [Fr(1ngClis]
[Privagy POligy] [Mi3iling L.ists] [TeghnicE:'lJ LibrC:l,ry]
[Cont(lgt C(lnL.l!]
by , L~xU.M _..__.__..________...__..___..________..._.._.._n..______..._.___._____m_.___ fef the Fod0J1aric'fl of LaW SOOJlou0s oJ Camtdi'l
"-"'"'
http://www . canlii. org/ on/ cas/ onlrb1200412004onlrb 12054 .html
10/3/2005