Bram Herlich

Applications withdrawn by leave of the Board.

The applicants sought to withdraw their applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave to withdraw the applications.

District of Parry Sound Social Services Administration Board v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2001 CanLII 10811

Bram Herlich

Board issues notice of intent to grant related employer declaration due to failure to respond.

The applicant union filed an application seeking a declaration that the responding parties are related employers under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

No responses were filed by the responding parties.

The Board directed that, in the absence of any objection received within 5 days, the requested declaration may issue.

Power Workers’ Union v. Hydro One Inc., 2001 CanLII 7313

Representation vote directed in certification application; majority declines to seal ballot box despite section 8.1 notice.

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 40% of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board directed a representation vote.

The responding party filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, disputing the bargaining unit's geographic scope and appropriateness.

The majority of the Board found that any numerical discrepancies were not significant for the purposes of section 8.1 and declined to seal the ballot box.

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

Industrial Wood and Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A.) Local 2995 v. North Star Linen & Uniform Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 7262

Bram Herlich

Motion to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint for delay and lack of prima facie case denied.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The union sought to dismiss the application on the basis that it failed to establish a prima facie case and for undue delay.

The Board declined to dismiss the application at this preliminary stage, finding that the pleadings generated the need for an explanation from the union and that the delay was only marginally in excess of one year.

The matter was directed to be listed for consultation.

Maurice LeBlanc v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113, 2001 CanLII 5534

Bram Herlich

Applications dismissed on agreement of the parties.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees brought applications against Canadian North Star Group Limited, with the Ontario Public Service Employees Union intervening.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the applications.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Canadian North Star Group Limited, 2001 CanLII 4688

Bram Herlich

Application withdrawn by leave of the Board.

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

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

Helen MacDonald v. Unite, Local 1664, 2001 CanLII 3493

Bram Herlich

Application for termination pay dismissed; failure to report for work after warning constituted wilful misconduct.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision not to issue an order for termination pay.

The applicant was discharged after failing to report for a scheduled Saturday shift, despite prior warnings that such failure would result in termination.

The applicant claimed he was unable to work due to pain and provided a doctor's note, but the Board found the note did not explicitly excuse him from work on that day and was not provided to the employer until months later.

The Board concluded that the applicant's failure to report constituted wilful misconduct, disentitling him to termination pay.

The application was dismissed.

Juan Barrueta v. Front End Specialists and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 6488

Bram Herlich

Board issues related and successor employer declarations on consent and orders union representation vote.

The parties reached an agreement resolving multiple applications under the Labour Relations Act and the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act.

On consent, the Board declared that the Westario entities constitute a single employer and a successor employer.

The Board ordered a representation vote to determine whether the employees will be represented by CUPE Local 255 or IBEW Local 636, and permitted the withdrawal of the remaining applications.

Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 255 v. Westario Power Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 11086

Bram Herlich

Union directed to provide proof that vacation pay cheques were cashed or arrange replacements.

In a previous decision, the Board dismissed the applicants' duty of fair representation complaints against the union, subject to a direction that the union provide documentary evidence of an amended Record of Employment and vacation pay for the applicants.

The union filed an amended Record of Employment and copies of internal payroll forms and a recent cheque.

The applicants denied receiving the documents or the payments.

The Board directed the union to either provide proof that the cheques were cashed or arrange for the employer to issue replacement cheques, while confirming that the applications otherwise remained dismissed.

Sosa v. Labourers International Union of North America, Local 183, 2001 CanLII 17822

Bram Herlich

Application partially withdrawn and adjourned sine die on unopposed request.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application against one responding party, Jean Pierre Fortier, and to adjourn the remainder of the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the unopposed request, withdrawing the application against Fortier with leave and adjourning the matter sine die for a period not to exceed 12 months.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 195 v. Michael Brassard, 2001 CanLII 3745

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 25, 2001

Application withdrawn by leave of the Board following execution of Minutes of Settlement.

The applicants and the responding party trade union executed Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Clark v. United Food and Commercial Workers, Locals 175 and 633, 2001 CanLII 6648

Bram Herlich

Not Practising Law25 cases1993–2022

Board accepts late and improperly served submissions from both parties, extending time limits accordingly.

The applicant filed submissions but failed to comply with Rule 33 of the Board's Rules of Procedure regarding delivery to the other parties.

The Board accepted the submissions because they eventually reached the responding parties' counsel.

The applicant subsequently objected to the intervenor employer's submissions, alleging they were filed late, again without copying the other parties.

The Board found the applicant's assertion hyperbolic, noted the lack of precise information due to the applicant's own non-compliance, and extended the time limits to accept the intervenor's submissions.

Maurice LeBlanc v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 30, 2001 CanLII 10863

Grainne McGrath

Bram Herlich

OGSBGrievance Settlement BoardFeb 19, 2001

Appeal for termination pay dismissed; repeated failure to wear safety glasses constituted willful misconduct.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision denying her termination and severance pay.

She was discharged for repeatedly failing to wear safety glasses, despite multiple warnings and a suspension.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that, although the safety rules may have been unevenly enforced, the applicant's repeated and persistent refusal to wear safety glasses constituted willful misconduct.

The appeal was dismissed.

Brenda Shalla v. Times Fiber Canada Ltd and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 6309

Fateh Salim

52 cases2000–2009

Bram Herlich

OGSB0 cases1990–2026

Grievance dismissed as untimely; Board declined to extend time limits due to extreme three-year delay.

The grievor was surplused in December 1995 and commenced a civil action against the employer in June 1997, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in May 1998.

The grievor then filed a grievance in December 1998, approximately three years after the surplus notice.

The employer raised a preliminary objection that the grievance was untimely.

The Grievance Settlement Board declined to exercise its discretion under section 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to extend the time limits, citing the extreme length of the delay and the lack of a reasonable explanation for failing to file a grievance earlier.

The grievance was dismissed as untimely.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Szabo) v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ontario Realty Corporation), 2001 CanLII 25764

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Board directs applicant to file submissions on timeliness of application to terminate bargaining rights.

The applicant filed an application for a declaration terminating bargaining rights.

The responding union asserted the application was untimely due to recent amendments to the Labour Relations Act, 1995 concerning the residential construction sector.

The Board directed the applicant to file submissions regarding the timeliness of the application.

Wieslaw Wierzba v. Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, 2000 CanLII 10489

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in certification application after employer failed to file a timely response.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party employer failed to file a response within the stipulated time, though it requested an extension which the Board denied.

Finding that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Northern Ontario Joint Council of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union District Council of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. Smooth Rock Falls Co-Operative, 2000 CanLII 5484

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote ordered in application for certification.

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.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board determined that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union at the time the application was made.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be taken among the employees in the voting constituency.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Watford Quality Care Centre, 2000 CanLII 1088

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 28, 2000

Duty of fair representation application dismissed for failure to provide particulars and extreme delay.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The Board previously directed the applicant to file a revised application with a coherent summary of facts and specific allegations.

The applicant filed further materials that failed to clarify the complaint, appeared to relate to events up to 19 years old, and sought fines against the employer and union, which the Board has no authority to levy.

The application was dismissed for failure to provide particulars, extreme delay, and seeking unavailable relief.

Rick Ward v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW Canada); CAW Local 1973, 2000 CanLII 5433

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 18, 2000

Application dismissed following arbitrator's dismissal of grievance and applicant's failure to respond.

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

Following an arbitrator's decision dismissing the applicant's grievance, the union and the intervenor employer requested that the application be dismissed.

The applicant did not provide any reason for the matter to proceed.

The Board dismissed the application based on the uncontested submissions.

Jacques Daoust v. Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees, 2000 CanLII 9415

Ted McDermott

1 case2000–2000

Donald K. Eady

20 cases1990–2005

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 15, 2000

Reprisal complaint dismissed; termination was for innocent absenteeism and section 50(7) does not apply to non-disciplinary discharges.

The applicant, a contract employee, was terminated by the employer due to a poor attendance record.

She filed a complaint alleging that her termination was an unlawful reprisal for raising health and safety concerns regarding dust and dust mites in the workplace, contrary to section 50(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Board found that the termination was part of a province-wide review of contract staff and was based entirely on her absenteeism, with no anti-safety animus.

The Board also held that it lacked jurisdiction under section 50(7) of the OHSA to substitute a penalty, as that provision applies only to disciplinary discharges, whereas the applicant's termination for innocent absenteeism was non-disciplinary.

The application was dismissed.

Bonita Almond v. Ontario Property Assessment Corporation, 2000 CanLII 10086

for Airline Limousine

Mark A. StoneCounsel
2 appearances
Nick LeimonisAgent
2 appearances

for Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1703

Emile DagherUnion representative
2 appearances
Cynthia D. WatsonCounsel
2 appearances

for Beaver Lumber Company Limited

Matt CertosimoCounsel
1 appearance

for Conseil scolaire de district catholique centre-sud

Yvan O’ConnorAgent
1 appearance

for CUPE Local One

Vic DemeloUnion representative
1 appearance
Doug LefaiveUnion representative
1 appearance

for Front End Specialists

Cathy PortuondoAgent
1 appearance
Arsenio PortuondoAgent
1 appearance

for Ginoogaming First Nation

A. RasevychCounsel
1 appearance

for Glopak Inc.

Jacques GirouxAgent
1 appearance

for himself

Carlos E. MarchSelf-represented
1 appearance

for James Gingerich

Derrick BewsterAgent
1 appearance
James GingerichSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Kimberly Clark Forest Products Inc.

R. E. MannistoCounsel
1 appearance

for Linamar Company, Vehcom Manufacturing

D. Brent LabordCounsel
1 appearance
Peter JovanovichAgent
1 appearance
Chris MacRaeAgent
1 appearance

for Long Lake Employees Association and Ginoogaming First Nation

John EricksonCounsel
1 appearance

for Long Lake Forest Products Inc.

F.J. W. BickfordCounsel
1 appearance
T. E. InglisCounsel
1 appearance

for Ministry of Labour

Karima ChaturCounsel
1 appearance

for Morrison’s Auto Body & Sales

Randy MorrisonAgent
1 appearance

for Mr. Keating, A Third Party

Andrew CammanCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Provincial Police

Lynn DonnellyCounsel
2 appearances

for Roch Drouin

Roch DrouinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Louise LacasseAgent
1 appearance

for Teamsters Local Union 91

A. PapineauUnion representative
1 appearance

for the applicant

Ed. OgizowskiAgent
1 appearance
B. JamesCounsel
1 appearance
Mike DesbiensCounsel
1 appearance
Eugenia CappetteroAgent
1 appearance
Shainshir GillAgent
1 appearance
Frank LuceCounsel
1 appearance
H. KopytoAgent
1 appearance
Tina LindsayCounsel
1 appearance
Jeff EleveldAgent
1 appearance
Mike DubreuilAgent
1 appearance
Mike McCrearvCounsel
1 appearance
George BalisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Francis KeysAgent
1 appearance
Gabriel AzmitiaAgent
1 appearance
Ruth WarnerAgent
1 appearance
Linda AckworthCounsel
1 appearance
Bonita AlmondSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donald K. EadyCounsel
1 appearance
Bev CliffordAgent
1 appearance
Allison CormieSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Bienvenido T. PascoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Emmanuel AbegunrinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Rick OverendSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kevin HayesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Afifi KhalilSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the applicants

Tim HanniganCounsel
1 appearance
Diane MargisAgent
1 appearance
Raja WysockiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Graham SmithSelf-represented
1 appearance
Howard CadeskySelf-represented
1 appearance
Allen OuelletteSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mira KatzSelf-represented
1 appearance
Richard BosadaAgent
1 appearance
Joffre BerubéSelf-represented
1 appearance
Reneé LégerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Harriet KatzAgent
1 appearance
Shelley Robinson-FoleySelf-represented
1 appearance
Dave HepworthAgent
1 appearance
Ed J. HolmesCounsel
1 appearance
Heather MacKinnonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Janet van den HeuvelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Charles WilburnSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the applicants in Board File 2185-97-R

Nick PapaioannouSelf-represented
1 appearance
David PeeverSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Association

Kelly DoctorCounsel
7 appearances
Larry RobbinsAgent
2 appearances
Sarah RostomCounsel
1 appearance
Marisa PollockCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Union of Public Employees

James KeenanUnion representative
1 appearance
Dave BanksUnion representative
1 appearance

for the CAW Canada

Lewis GottheilCounsel
1 appearance

for the complainant

H. John BarnesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Manuel MartinsAgent
1 appearance
Anthony MaiheiroAgent
1 appearance
Jos 2i MartinsAgent
1 appearance
L. E. LeblancAgent
1 appearance

for the employee

Mia LondonCounsel
1 appearance
Elisabeth BruckmannCounsel
1 appearance

for the employer

Maura PelletierAgent
1 appearance
Kaleem AhmadCounsel
1 appearance
Paul DellemanAgent
1 appearance
Christopher LeafloorCounsel
1 appearance
Ken HughesAgent
1 appearance

for the Employer

Suneel BahalCounsel
16 appearances
Peter DailleboustCounsel
12 appearances
Kevin DorganCounsel
9 appearances
Susan MunnCounsel
8 appearances
George ParrisCounsel
7 appearances
Stewart McMahonCounsel
7 appearances
Lisa CompagnoneCounsel
6 appearances
Caroline CohenCounsel
6 appearances
Omar ShahabCounsel
5 appearances
Roslyn BaichooCounsel
5 appearances
Debra KyleCounsel
5 appearances
Felix LauCounsel
5 appearances
Christopher JodhanCounsel
5 appearances
Robert FredericksCounsel
5 appearances
Greg GledhillAgent
4 appearances
Michael BriscoeAgent
4 appearances
Michelle DobranowskiCounsel
4 appearances
Brian LoewenCounsel
4 appearances
Joohyung LeeCounsel
3 appearances
John O'ReillyCounsel
3 appearances

for the employer SACCK

Maureen AddieAgent
1 appearance

for the Grievor

Allison Kabayama-HunUnion representative
1 appearance
Don MartinUnion representative
1 appearance
Graham WilliamsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 636

Harold G. VanceUnion representative
1 appearance

for the intervenor

John L. StoutCounsel
1 appearance
Craig WallaceAgent
1 appearance
Garry ThayerAgent
1 appearance
Elizabeth BlundenCounsel
1 appearance
David WhiteCounsel
1 appearance
Marianne ChandlerAgent
1 appearance
Mike AzizCounsel
1 appearance
Peter ChauvinAgent
1 appearance
Graham WellsCounsel
1 appearance
Fred Von VehCounsel
1 appearance
Lith MartellAgent
1 appearance
Janice CarneyAgent
1 appearance
Peter VanderkloetUnion representative
1 appearance
Marlene AdelsonAgent
1 appearance
Grant BowersCounsel
1 appearance
Paul DeBuonoCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia G. MurrayAgent
1 appearance
Dolores BarbiniCounsel
1 appearance
John MorrisonCounsel
1 appearance
Karen SargeantCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenors (the Skilled Trades Employees)

Dennis CharbonneauAgent
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Labour

Alicia Gordon-FaganCounsel
3 appearances
Grainne McGrathCounsel
3 appearances
Murray KleinCounsel
2 appearances
Jeremy WarningCounsel
2 appearances
Karima ChaturAgent
2 appearances
L. EisenbergCounsel
2 appearances
Karima ChaturCounsel
1 appearance
Mark ShurvinCounsel
1 appearance
Mircho MirchevAgent
1 appearance
Karen NortheyCounsel
1 appearance
Frank CamilleriCounsel
1 appearance
K. LivingstoneCounsel
1 appearance
Bruce ArnottCounsel
1 appearance
Heidi Ann Lazar-MeynCounsel
1 appearance
Dan BeaulieuAgent
1 appearance

for the Office of the Chief Coroner

Hera EvansCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Provincial Police

Claudia BrabazonCounsel
2 appearances

for the respondent

B. CarrozziAgent
1 appearance
James D. ChurchAgent
1 appearance
A. M. MinskyCounsel
1 appearance
Gino San giovanniAgent
1 appearance
Russel ZinnCounsel
1 appearance
Nancy A. EberCounsel
1 appearance
Peter BourqueAgent
1 appearance

for the responding parties

Bob MasonCounsel
1 appearance
Ted PorterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joe TasconaCounsel
1 appearance

for the responding party

Brian WrightAgent
1 appearance
Risa PancerAgent
1 appearance
Gus ArrigoCounsel
1 appearance
Calvin CampbellAgent
1 appearance
S. HerseUnion representative
1 appearance
Richard RolloxUnion representative
1 appearance
Paul McLavghlinCounsel
1 appearance
Raymond VaillancourtAgent
1 appearance
Joanne MurphyUnion representative
1 appearance
Mike SmithAgent
1 appearance
Finian NelsonAgent
1 appearance
Ted McDermottCounsel
1 appearance
Robert GibsonUnion representative
1 appearance
Marc ValliancourtAgent
1 appearance
Dave EllulUnion representative
1 appearance
John ColettiCounsel
1 appearance
Jim ForsterAgent
1 appearance
Nancy TossavainenUnion representative
1 appearance
Greg MichalukUnion representative
1 appearance
Michelle L. DabsCounsel
1 appearance

for the responding party Times Fiber Canada Ltd.

Lillian DunbarAgent
1 appearance
John MartelliAgent
1 appearance
Barry HoltAgent
1 appearance

for the SEIU Local 663

Garry ThayerUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Third Party

Andrew F. CammanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Union

Ed HolmesCounsel
25 appearances
John BrewinCounsel
12 appearances
Tim HanniganCounsel
9 appearances
Jesse GutmanUnion representative
8 appearances
Stephen GilesUnion representative
8 appearances
Richard BlairCounsel
7 appearances
Mae J. NamCounsel
6 appearances
Jim PaulUnion representative
6 appearances
Tim MulhallUnion representative
5 appearances
Jane LettonCounsel
4 appearances
Seung ChiUnion representative
4 appearances
Mireille GirouxCounsel
3 appearances
Val PatrickUnion representative
3 appearances
James McDonaldCounsel
3 appearances
Shae MacPhersonCounsel
3 appearances
David WrightCounsel
3 appearances
Gavin LeebCounsel
3 appearances
James K. McDonaldCounsel
3 appearances
Craig FloodCounsel
2 appearances
Robin GordonUnion representative
2 appearances

for Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission

Glen RawsonAgent
1 appearance
Sharon HallAgent
1 appearance
E. C. Carla ZabekCounsel
1 appearance

for Westario Power Services Inc., Westario Power Inc., and Westario Power Holdings Inc.

Guy CluffAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of Norampac Inc

Toni LionettiAgent
1 appearance
Fiona SterlingAgent
1 appearance
Stephen BullAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the applicant

Rita QuonSelf-represented
2 appearances
J. S. CliffeAgent
1 appearance
J. S. CliffeCounsel
1 appearance

on behalf of the applicants in Board File 2185-97-R

David PeeverSelf-represented
1 appearance
Nick PapaioannouSelf-represented
1 appearance

on behalf of the intervenor

David IrvineAgent
1 appearance
Andy AndersonAgent
1 appearance
Leslee WillsAgent
1 appearance
Shane SmithAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Ministry of Labour

Jeremy WarningCounsel
2 appearances
Laurie EisenbergCounsel
1 appearance
L. EisenbergCounsel
1 appearance

on behalf of the responding parties Marie Estrelita Castro and Aledin Castro

Aledin M. CastroSelf-represented
1 appearance
Columbia DiazAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the responding party

Shawn WilliamsUnion representative
1 appearance
Tom DattilolUnion representative
1 appearance
Rob HobbsUnion representative
1 appearance
Don WarnerUnion representative
1 appearance
Thomas ParkUnion representative
1 appearance
Geoff DalzielUnion representative
1 appearance

on her own behalf

Danusia SzpakSelf-represented
1 appearance

on his own behalf

John SteadmanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ross McBrideSelf-represented
1 appearance
Hector (Chuck) DepelteauSelf-represented
1 appearance
Douglas L. CritchSelf-represented
1 appearance
Tom JohnstonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ed FroomeSelf-represented
1 appearance
Peter PleasantSelf-represented
1 appearance
Barry WeislederSelf-represented
1 appearance
Doug MaySelf-represented
1 appearance
A. George DragoneSelf-represented
1 appearance
Walter F. PintoSelf-represented
1 appearance

on their own behalf

Gerald DiakowSelf-represented
1 appearance
Susan GilbertSelf-represented
1 appearance

477

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

1.1

cases/mo

OLRB301(63%)

OGSB176(37%)

Decision types

motion

336

trial

105

appeal

/Adjudicator

Bram Herlich — Vice-Chair

Employment and Labour Law

Bram Herlich

Vice-Chair·Ontario Labour Relations Board·Since 1990

OLRB OGSB

477

cases · 37 yrs · OLRB, OGSB

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-Chair· 283Vice-Chair· 67Vice-Chair· 60Arbitrator· 53Adjudicator/Referee· 9Vice-Chair· Chair· 2Referee· 1Vice Chair· 1

Bram Herlich

Applications withdrawn by leave of the Board.

The applicants sought to withdraw their applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave to withdraw the applications.

District of Parry Sound Social Services Administration Board v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2001 CanLII 10811

Bram Herlich

OLRBDissenting0 cases1980–2001

Board issues notice of intent to grant related employer declaration due to failure to respond.

The applicant union filed an application seeking a declaration that the responding parties are related employers under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

No responses were filed by the responding parties.

The Board directed that, in the absence of any objection received within 5 days, the requested declaration may issue.

Power Workers’ Union v. Hydro One Inc., 2001 CanLII 7313

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBMajority0 cases1987–2001

Bram Herlich

OLRBMajority (Wrote the majority reasons)0 cases1990–2026

Representation vote directed in certification application; majority declines to seal ballot box despite section 8.1 notice.

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 40% of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board directed a representation vote.

The responding party filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, disputing the bargaining unit's geographic scope and appropriateness.

The majority of the Board found that any numerical discrepancies were not significant for the purposes of section 8.1 and declined to seal the ballot box.

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

Industrial Wood and Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A.) Local 2995 v. North Star Linen & Uniform Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 7262

Bram Herlich

Motion to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint for delay and lack of prima facie case denied.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The union sought to dismiss the application on the basis that it failed to establish a prima facie case and for undue delay.

The matter was directed to be listed for consultation.

Maurice LeBlanc v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113, 2001 CanLII 5534

Bram Herlich

Applications dismissed on agreement of the parties.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees brought applications against Canadian North Star Group Limited, with the Ontario Public Service Employees Union intervening.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the applications.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Canadian North Star Group Limited, 2001 CanLII 4688

Bram Herlich

Application withdrawn by leave of the Board.

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

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

Helen MacDonald v. Unite, Local 1664, 2001 CanLII 3493

Bram Herlich

Application for termination pay dismissed; failure to report for work after warning constituted wilful misconduct.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision not to issue an order for termination pay.

The applicant was discharged after failing to report for a scheduled Saturday shift, despite prior warnings that such failure would result in termination.

The Board concluded that the applicant's failure to report constituted wilful misconduct, disentitling him to termination pay.

The application was dismissed.

Juan Barrueta v. Front End Specialists and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 6488

Bram Herlich

Board issues related and successor employer declarations on consent and orders union representation vote.

The parties reached an agreement resolving multiple applications under the Labour Relations Act and the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act.

On consent, the Board declared that the Westario entities constitute a single employer and a successor employer.

The Board ordered a representation vote to determine whether the employees will be represented by CUPE Local 255 or IBEW Local 636, and permitted the withdrawal of the remaining applications.

Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 255 v. Westario Power Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 11086

Bram Herlich

Union directed to provide proof that vacation pay cheques were cashed or arrange replacements.

The union filed an amended Record of Employment and copies of internal payroll forms and a recent cheque.

The applicants denied receiving the documents or the payments.

Sosa v. Labourers International Union of North America, Local 183, 2001 CanLII 17822

Bram Herlich

Application partially withdrawn and adjourned sine die on unopposed request.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application against one responding party, Jean Pierre Fortier, and to adjourn the remainder of the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the unopposed request, withdrawing the application against Fortier with leave and adjourning the matter sine die for a period not to exceed 12 months.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 195 v. Michael Brassard, 2001 CanLII 3745

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 25, 2001

Application withdrawn by leave of the Board following execution of Minutes of Settlement.

The applicants and the responding party trade union executed Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Clark v. United Food and Commercial Workers, Locals 175 and 633, 2001 CanLII 6648

Bram Herlich

Not Practising Law25 cases1993–2022

Board accepts late and improperly served submissions from both parties, extending time limits accordingly.

The applicant filed submissions but failed to comply with Rule 33 of the Board's Rules of Procedure regarding delivery to the other parties.

The Board accepted the submissions because they eventually reached the responding parties' counsel.

The applicant subsequently objected to the intervenor employer's submissions, alleging they were filed late, again without copying the other parties.

Maurice LeBlanc v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 30, 2001 CanLII 10863

Grainne McGrath

Bram Herlich

OGSBGrievance Settlement BoardFeb 19, 2001

Appeal for termination pay dismissed; repeated failure to wear safety glasses constituted willful misconduct.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision denying her termination and severance pay.

She was discharged for repeatedly failing to wear safety glasses, despite multiple warnings and a suspension.

The appeal was dismissed.

Brenda Shalla v. Times Fiber Canada Ltd and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 6309

Fateh Salim

52 cases2000–2009

Bram Herlich

OGSB0 cases1990–2026

Grievance dismissed as untimely; Board declined to extend time limits due to extreme three-year delay.

The grievor was surplused in December 1995 and commenced a civil action against the employer in June 1997, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in May 1998.

The grievor then filed a grievance in December 1998, approximately three years after the surplus notice.

The employer raised a preliminary objection that the grievance was untimely.

The grievance was dismissed as untimely.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Szabo) v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ontario Realty Corporation), 2001 CanLII 25764

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Board directs applicant to file submissions on timeliness of application to terminate bargaining rights.

The applicant filed an application for a declaration terminating bargaining rights.

The responding union asserted the application was untimely due to recent amendments to the Labour Relations Act, 1995 concerning the residential construction sector.

The Board directed the applicant to file submissions regarding the timeliness of the application.

Wieslaw Wierzba v. Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, 2000 CanLII 10489

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in certification application after employer failed to file a timely response.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party employer failed to file a response within the stipulated time, though it requested an extension which the Board denied.

Finding that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Northern Ontario Joint Council of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union District Council of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. Smooth Rock Falls Co-Operative, 2000 CanLII 5484

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote ordered in application for certification.

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.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be taken among the employees in the voting constituency.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Watford Quality Care Centre, 2000 CanLII 1088

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 28, 2000

Duty of fair representation application dismissed for failure to provide particulars and extreme delay.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The Board previously directed the applicant to file a revised application with a coherent summary of facts and specific allegations.

The application was dismissed for failure to provide particulars, extreme delay, and seeking unavailable relief.

Rick Ward v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW Canada); CAW Local 1973, 2000 CanLII 5433

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 18, 2000

Application dismissed following arbitrator's dismissal of grievance and applicant's failure to respond.

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

Following an arbitrator's decision dismissing the applicant's grievance, the union and the intervenor employer requested that the application be dismissed.

The applicant did not provide any reason for the matter to proceed.

The Board dismissed the application based on the uncontested submissions.

Jacques Daoust v. Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees, 2000 CanLII 9415

Ted McDermott

1 case2000–2000

Donald K. Eady

20 cases1990–2005

Bram Herlich