Anthony Brown

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The responding party requested an adjournment of the hearing because its principal representative was sick and unable to attend.

The applicant objected to the adjournment.

The Board granted the adjournment, noting that sickness is an exceptional circumstance justifying an adjournment, and directed the responding party to produce a medical note confirming the illness.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of Value Village Stores Inc. in Whitby.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate will issue to the applicant.

The applicants filed an application for termination of bargaining rights on December 7, 2000.

The Minister of Labour had advised the parties on November 30, 2000, that he did not consider it advisable to appoint a conciliation board.

Under subsection 67(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, an application for termination cannot be made until 30 days have elapsed after the Minister informs the parties that a conciliation board will not be appointed.

Because 30 days had not elapsed, the Board found the application to be untimely and dismissed it without ordering a representation vote.

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for employees of Wendigo Lake Expeditions Inc. A representation vote was held, and not more than 50% of the ballots cast were in favour of the applicant.

As a result, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the union for this bargaining unit.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

As the applicant bore the onus of producing evidence in support of the application, and no evidence was adduced, the Board dismissed the application at the request of the Ministry of Labour.

The applicant filed an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 seeking a declaration that the responding party union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The union subsequently advised the Board in writing that it no longer wished to represent the employees.

Pursuant to section 63(17) of the Act, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further applications for certification by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at the responding party's workplace.

A representation vote was held, and more than 50% of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant.

No statements of desire to make representations were filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the certificate and cancelled previously set meeting and hearing dates.

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the bargaining unit appropriate and ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union for failing to pursue his termination grievance to arbitration.

The applicant had been terminated for unauthorized absence after travelling to India while on medical leave.

The union investigated the grievance, requested medical information which the applicant failed to provide, and concluded the grievance was unlikely to succeed given his past record.

The applicant also alleged the union conspired with the employer because he raised concerns about product labelling.

The Board dismissed the application, finding the union investigated the matter thoroughly and its decision was not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant union, and with no statement of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon unit of employees at The Corporation of Glengarda Child and Family Services.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Board decision dated October 23, 2000.

Although the application was filed late, the Board extended the time for filing.

Applying established principles for reconsideration, the Board found that the applicant did not adduce new evidence or raise new representations, but merely attempted to reargue the matter.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Board decision that dismissed his duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The applicant reiterated his allegations regarding the union's handling of his grievances and settlement, and its alleged failure to safeguard his rights under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

The Board applied its established principles for reconsideration, noting that the applicant merely disagreed with the original decision and did not present new evidence or demonstrate an obvious error.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a prior Board decision that dismissed his duty of fair representation complaint.

The request was filed late but permitted to proceed.

The Board applied its established principles for reconsideration and found that the applicant merely disagreed with the original decision, without raising new evidence, obvious errors, or important policy issues.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

The applicant applied for a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to make an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing despite being duly notified.

Consequently, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

As the applicant bore the onus of producing evidence and failed to do so, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The applicant sought an extension of time to file an application for review of an Employment Standards Officer's order to pay $3,541.98 plus administration fees.

The Board had previously declined to extend the time because no money had been paid to the Director of Employment Standards in trust.

The applicant submitted a new request with a photocopy of a cheque for $892.62.

The Board found that the required amount had still not been paid into trust and terminated the application.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had the requisite 40% membership support.

The Board directed a representation vote.

The intervenor requested that the application be dismissed or the ballot box sealed due to alleged unfair practices and breaches of a court order and union constitution.

The Board dismissed the intervenor's requests and directed the vote to proceed.