Caroline Rowan

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated November 2, 2000.

Pursuant to section 114(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board amended paragraph 56 of the decision by substituting the word 'both' with the word 'all'.

The CAW filed displacement applications for bargaining units at three hospitals currently represented by SEIU.

SEIU objected that the applications were untimely under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, arguing the collective agreements were for a term of less than three years because their effective date was determined by the date of an interest arbitration award under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act (HLDAA).

The Board dismissed the objection, finding that the parties had agreed to a six-year term, which prevailed over the default terms in HLDAA.

Therefore, section 7(5) of the Act applied, and the applications were timely.

The applicant union sought a related employer and sale of business declaration against multiple responding corporate entities.

Several responding parties failed to attend the hearing, and the remaining active responding parties did not oppose the related employer declaration.

The Board applied its Rules of Procedure regarding failure to attend, accepted the applicant's submissions, and declared that five of the responding entities constitute a single employer bound by the applicable provincial collective agreement.

The hearing on the remaining issues was scheduled to continue at a later date.

The CAW filed displacement applications for full-time and part-time bargaining units at St. Joseph's General Hospital.

The incumbent union, SEIU Local 204, objected that the applications were untimely under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, arguing the collective agreements commenced on the date of an interest arbitration award and were for a term of less than three years.

The CAW argued the agreements were for a six-year term by agreement of the parties, making the applications timely under section 7(5).

The Board found that the parties had agreed to a six-year term expiring in October 2001, which prevailed over the statutory default terms in the Hospital Labour Dispute Arbitration Act.

The timeliness objection was dismissed and the ballots were ordered to be counted.

The applicant employer sought review of an Order to Pay one week's termination pay to a former employee.

The employer argued that the employee, who worked for exactly three months, was not entitled to termination pay and was terminated for wilful misconduct after allegedly damaging equipment.

The Board found that an employee employed for exactly three months is entitled to notice under the Employment Standards Act.

Furthermore, the Board held that the employer failed to prove the employee's actions constituted wilful misconduct, as the evidence of deliberate or reckless damage was insufficient.

The Order to Pay was affirmed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned a scheduled hearing on consent of the parties.

The hearing was rescheduled to November 23 and 24, 2000.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the union violated section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The union requested that the Board dismiss the application without a hearing on the basis that it failed to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board reviewed the pleadings and declined to dismiss the application, referring the matter to the Registrar to be set down for a consultation.

The union brought an application under section 69 and subsection 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

At the commencement of the hearing, the union requested an order for the production of documents from two of the responding parties who did not appear.

The Board ordered the non-appearing responding parties to provide the union with reasonable access to the requested documents for inspection and photocopying, noting the implied undertaking that the documents not be used for a collateral or ulterior purpose.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted a consent adjournment of the matter to February 2001, based on the agreement of the parties.

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

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

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 certified the union as the exclusive bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The responding parties requested reconsideration of the Board's decision dated August 3, 2000.

The Board directed the union to file a response to the request within 15 days, and allowed the responding parties 5 days thereafter to file any reply submissions.

The applicant union applied for certification.

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 certified the union as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for 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 agreed-upon bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board directed that a certificate issue to the applicant and cancelled previously set meeting and hearing dates.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of employees of the responding party.

Following a representation vote in which more than fifty per cent 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 certified the union.

A certificate was ordered to issue to the applicant.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty percent of the ballots cast 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 requested leave to amend its application to add Java Joe's Ltd. as a responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and referred the matter to the Registrar to re-process the application.

The applicants filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union, alleging a breach of section 74 of the Act regarding a conflict with the Chief Steward and the union's refusal to file a grievance concerning her conduct.

The Board directed the applicants to file submissions responding to the union's position that the application failed to make out a prima facie case, but no submissions were received.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the complaint involved an internal union matter rather than the union's representation of the employees vis-à-vis the employer, and therefore did not establish a prima facie breach of section 74.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party.

A representation vote was held, but the union failed to obtain more than 50% of the ballots cast.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on future certification applications by the union for this bargaining unit.

The applicant, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1623, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Sudbury Regional Hospital Corporation.

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