Anthony Brown

The applicant requested to withdraw the application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant filed an application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

Having regard to an agreement filed by the parties, the Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The applicants sought to withdraw their application against the responding party.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party employer disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit, proposed a different unit, and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The employer also alleged improper service.

The majority of the Board found the numerical difference between the parties was not significant and directed a representation vote, with disputed ballots to be segregated.

The dissenting Board member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant sought to withdraw the application against the responding party union.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

The Board determined that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite forty percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held, with segregated ballots for two disputed positions.

The applicant filed an application against the Toronto District School Board and CUPE Local 4400.

On consent of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent certain employees of the Toronto Transit Commission.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board compared the membership evidence against the employer's information and found the numerical difference was not significant.

The Board ordered a representation vote and directed that the ballots be counted, with any disputed positions segregated.

A dissenting Board member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent paramedical employees of the responding party hospital.

Upon reviewing the application and membership evidence, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the support of at least forty percent of the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent registered nurses at a nursing home.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant requested that the Board deal with a reference by the Minister under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act by written submissions.

The responding party objected.

The Board denied the request and directed the parties to appear at the scheduled oral hearing.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent a bargaining unit of maintenance and service employees at the Waterloo Catholic District School Board, currently represented by SEIU Local 220.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that it appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board ordered a representation vote.

Because the responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board directed that the ballot box be sealed pending further order or agreement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued an amendment to its decision dated June 11, 2001, substituting the date June 21, 2001 for June 14, 2001.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board directed a representation vote and ordered that ballots of individuals in disputed positions be segregated.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the Algoma District Health Unit.

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

Based on the application and membership evidence, the Board found that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 alleging a violation of the union's duty of fair representation under section 74.

The responding party union objected to the applicant filing a reply to the responses.

The Board declined to strike the reply, finding it clarified the applicant's position.

The Board directed the Registrar to schedule the application for a consultation, noting that concerns regarding ongoing criminal charges against a union representative could be raised at the consultation.