Duty of fair representation complaint dismissed where applicant freely signed reasonable grievance settlement at mediation.
The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, seeking to have his discharge grievance advanced to arbitration.
The grievance had previously been settled at mediation, with the applicant signing a settlement that included his resignation and a payment of over $34,000.
The Board dismissed the complaint, finding that the union did not act arbitrarily, discriminatorily, or in bad faith, and that the settlement was reasonable given the employer's evidence regarding the alleged patient abuse.
Employer's request to delay paying undisputed wages pending civil litigation set-off dismissed under ESA.
The employer applied to review an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay for unpaid wages owed to a former employee.
The employer did not dispute the wages were owed but requested the proceedings be adjourned or the funds held in trust until related civil litigation involving the parties was resolved, arguing for a potential set-off.
The Board dismissed the application, finding that section 8 of the Employment Standards Act strictly prohibits employers from claiming a set-off against wages.
The Board held there was no legal basis to delay payment to the employee while awaiting the outcome of separate civil proceedings.
Application withdrawn by leave of the Board following execution of Minutes of Settlement.
The parties executed and filed Minutes of Settlement on the day scheduled for consultation.
Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Union's bargaining rights terminated following a representation vote where the majority opposed the union.
The applicant applied for a declaration terminating the responding party union's bargaining rights.
Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and the union's withdrawal of its reconsideration request and allegations under the Labour Relations Act, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.
Hearing adjourned on consent after applicants received extremely short notice.
The applicants, directors of several health centres, appealed under section 58.22(2) of the Employment Standards Act.
The matter was scheduled for a hearing, but the applicants received extremely short notice.
Several applicants wrote to the Board requesting an adjournment.
At the hearing, only counsel for the Ministry of Labour attended.
The Ministry consented to the adjournment request, and the adjudicator adjourned the hearing to a later date.
Board directs continuation of consultation in duty of fair representation complaint regarding union's refusal to arbitrate.
The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union for its decision not to advance his discharge grievance to arbitration.
The applicant was discharged for allegedly smoking marijuana on duty, which he denied.
Following an initial consultation, the Board determined it could not finally dispose of the matter based solely on the information provided.
The Board directed that the consultation continue, requiring the union to call evidence subject to cross-examination to establish the basis for its decision not to arbitrate the grievance.
Duty of fair representation application dismissed; union's decision to settle grievance was reasonable.
The applicant filed an application alleging that his union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act by settling his harassment grievance without his consent.
The grievance arose after the employer removed the applicant's truck while he was taking his breaks at home.
The union settled the grievance for $1,700, which was slightly less than the full compensation the applicant demanded.
The Board dismissed the application, finding that the union's decision to settle was entirely reasonable given the circumstances and the likelihood of a less favourable result at arbitration.
Union certification granted for hospital service employees following a successful representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of service employees at Brockville General Hospital.
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 granted certification and ordered a certificate to issue.
Board granted joint application for early termination of collective agreement.
The applicant employer and respondent union filed a joint application for the Board's consent to the early termination of their collective agreement.
Notice of the application was posted, and no objections were filed by any affected employees.
The Board granted consent to the early termination, noting that the current agreement would expire on November 4, 2001, and a newly ratified agreement would take effect on November 5, 2001.
Application for certification dismissed after union failed to win majority in representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification.
A representation vote was held, but not more than 50% of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.
As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application for certification and directed the parties' attention to the potential bar on subsequent applications under section 10(3) of the Act.
Application withdrawn by leave of the Board.
The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Union decertified following a representation vote where a majority opposed the union.
The applicant applied to decertify the responding party union.
Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor hospital.
The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party employer.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
Union certification granted following successful representation vote.
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.
Intervenor granted conditional leave to withdraw its intervention absent objections from other parties.
The intervenor, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175, requested leave to withdraw its intervention in the proceeding.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, noting that the intervention would be deemed withdrawn by leave of the Board unless any other party submitted objections within two weeks.
Union certification granted for hospital maintenance staff following successful representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of maintenance staff at York Central Hospital.
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.
Board lists unfair labour practice and certification applications together but denies request to seal ballot box.
The applicant union filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging unfair labour practices and indicating an intent to rely on section 11 for its certification application.
The union requested that the section 96 application be consolidated with the certification application and that the ballot box from the upcoming representation vote be sealed.
The Board directed that the matters be listed to be heard together but denied the request to seal the ballot box, finding no pressing reason to do so.
Board grants amendment to add National Union as responding party and directs submissions on timeliness.
The applicants sought to amend their application to add the National Union as a responding party.
The Board granted the amendment, noting its practice of allowing applicants to select their responding parties, though it cautioned that this did not mean the selection was appropriate.
The Board also directed the applicants to provide submissions responding to the locals' motion to dismiss the application as untimely, given that the most recent event occurred more than two years prior to the application.
Board relieves against union's one-day delay in filing submissions and directs employer to proceed first.
In a certification application and related unfair labour practice complaint, the employer argued that the union had abandoned its challenges to the managerial status of four individuals by filing its submissions one business day late.
The Board exercised its discretion to relieve against the strict application of the Rules, finding the delay was marginal, caused no prejudice, and the union's position had been clear throughout.
The Board also ruled that the two applications would be heard together and directed the employer to proceed first in calling its evidence on all issues.
Board directs representation vote in application for certification with segregated ballots for disputed positions.
The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.
The Board found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.
The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with segregated ballots for disputed positions including maintenance, truck drivers, group leaders, and distribution coordinators.