Anthony Brown

The applicant union filed an application against the responding party employer.

The parties subsequently notified the Board that they had reached a settlement.

The Board granted leave for the application to be withdrawn.

The applicants and responding parties agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the application will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The applicant sought reconsideration of an August 2, 2001 Board decision, arguing that the Board was biased against him by urging settlement and deciding the matter without hearing from the responding party or intervenor.

The Board declined to reconsider the decision, finding that the applicant raised no new facts or arguments and was merely attempting to reargue the matter.

The Board also rejected the bias allegation, noting that urging settlement and ruling in favour of one party does not indicate bias.

The parties agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

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

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing, and the Board dismissed the application orally.

The applicant later requested a new hearing date, claiming he missed the hearing because he misplaced his calendar during a move.

The Board found this was not a valid reason for failing to appear and dismissed the application.

The applicant requested an adjournment prior to the hearing date but was advised that consent of all parties was required.

On the scheduled hearing date, no parties appeared.

The Board adjourned the hearing to a new date to be set by the Registrar.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application for certification following the signing of Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application, directed the parties to subsection 7(10) of the Act regarding future applications, and ordered the destruction of ballots cast in the representation vote.

The applicant sought to withdraw their application for review.

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

The applicant, Carrie Green, sought to withdraw her application against the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and the Ministry of Labour.

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

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 burden of proof, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application due to the absence of any evidence.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, relating to a sick benefit grievance and events from 1994 and 1995.

The Board dismissed the application without a hearing, finding that the applicant failed to plead any facts showing how the union violated its duty, thereby failing to establish a prima facie case.

Furthermore, the Board declined to hear the matter due to the undue delay of several years in filing the complaint.

The applicant hospital brought an application under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 following its termination of a dietary services management agreement with Cara Operations Limited.

The parties agreed that a sale of a business and intermingling of employees had occurred, and that the appropriate bargaining unit was the service unit represented by OPSEU.

SEIU Local 220 did not assert bargaining rights.

The Board issued declarations reflecting the parties' agreement but declined to make an order regarding the dovetailing of seniority, finding it lacked jurisdiction to do so under section 69 of the Act.

The applicant filed an application alleging the union breached its duty of fair representation regarding his resignation following allegations of sexual misconduct.

The union and the employer sought to dismiss the application without a hearing, arguing it failed to disclose a prima facie case and was filed after an undue delay of 23 months.

The Board declined to dismiss the application on a preliminary basis, finding significant factual disputes regarding the resignation and the reasons for the delay.

The matter was referred to the Registrar to be scheduled for a consultation.

The union filed an unfair labour practice application alleging the employer violated the Labour Relations Act, 1995 by refusing to consider an individual for employment because of his union membership.

The parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the application.

On consent, the Board declared that the employer violated sections 72 and 76 of the Act, ordered the employer to offer the next available journeyman electrician position to the individual or another union member, and ordered the employer to pay $10,500 to the union.

The Board also ordered the employer to provide the union with job site information, employee lists, and an opportunity to meet with employees.

The parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve an unfair labour practice complaint alleging violations of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

On consent, the Board declared that the employer violated the Act by refusing to consider a union member for employment.

The Board ordered the employer to offer the next available position to the member, pay $10,500 to the union, provide the union with job site and employee information, and allow the union to meet with employees.

The application was deemed terminated.

The applicants requested an adjournment of the hearing scheduled for August 21, 2001, due to the unavailability of counsel and difficulties in subpoenaing witnesses on short notice.

The Ministry of Labour consented to the new dates in October.

The Board granted the adjournment, cancelling the August date and rescheduling the hearing to October 18 and 19, 2001, noting it would be difficult for the applicants to contact all individual complainants for agreement.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging the union violated its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act by withdrawing his grievance regarding his termination for alleged theft.

The Board found that the applicant failed to plead a prima facie case, as he merely disagreed with the union's decision and did not assert any facts showing arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith conduct.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant claimed the union acted in bad faith when its representative withdrew shortly before a Workplace Safety and Insurance Board hearing and subsequently failed to provide a representative from the automotive sector for an appeal.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the withdrawal was at the applicant's request due to a conflict of interest allegation, and the union had taken steps to protect the applicant's rights.

The Board also held that the applicant did not have the right to dictate which union representative would handle his file.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging that his union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, primarily due to delays and alleged mishandling of his grievances by a union representative.

The Board dismissed the application at the consultation stage for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board found no evidence that the union's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith, noting that the grievances were processed and the union is not held to a standard of perfection.

The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the applications will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.