Christopher J. Albertyn

Deadline set for filing an intervention.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief procedural decision allowing the Canadian Health Care Workers to file their intervention by 4:30 p.m. on August 2, 2001.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 11596

Christopher J. Albertyn

Time limits for responses abridged in union succession application to expedite representation vote.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights of a predecessor trade union.

The responding employer objected to the abridgement of the time limit for filing responses and interventions but provided no explanation.

Given the likelihood of a representation vote, the Board abridged the time limits and directed the employer to provide a list of employees in the bargaining unit.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 14494

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board declares CAW-Canada acquired bargaining rights of SEIU Local 268 following successful representation vote.

The applicant union, CAW-Canada, applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor union, SEIU Local 268.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of CAW-Canada, the Board granted the declaration.

CAW-Canada acquired the collective bargaining rights for the support service worker employees of the Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay in the Homes for the Aged Division.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 268, 2001 CanLII 12897

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board issues procedural directions and abridges time for responses in union successor rights application.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor union.

The Board abridged the time for filing responses and interventions and directed the employer to provide a list of employees in the bargaining unit in preparation for a likely representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 10378

Christopher J. Albertyn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 30, 2001

Time limits abridged for responses in union successor rights application to expedite representation vote.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights of a predecessor trade union.

Following a previous decision, the responding employer objected to the abridgement of time limits for filing responses, citing incomplete documentation.

The Board found no persuasive reasons to delay the representation vote and ordered the abridgement of time limits for filing responses and interventions.

The employer was directed to provide employee names and proposals for the representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 16191

Christopher J. Albertyn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 30, 2001

Time limits for filing responses abridged to expedite representation vote in union succession application.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights of a predecessor trade union.

Following a previous decision, the responding employer objected to the abridgement of time limits for filing responses, citing incomplete documentation.

The Board found no persuasive reasons to delay the representation vote, noted the applicant had since provided the application to the employer, and ordered the abridgement of time limits for filing responses and interventions.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 10175

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board directs parties to advise of objections to abridging time limits for successor rights representation vote.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights of a predecessor trade union.

The unions agreed that the application would be determined by a representation vote.

The Board directed the responding parties and interested employees to advise if they objected to abridging the time limit for filing responses and interventions to expedite the vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 18326

Christopher J. Albertyn

Time for responses abridged and employer directed to provide employee list in union succession application.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor union.

The Board abridged the time for filing responses and interventions and directed the employer to provide a list of all employees in the bargaining unit in preparation for a likely representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 15102

Christopher J. Albertyn

Representation vote ordered to determine if applicant union should succeed predecessor union as bargaining agent.

The applicant trade union brought an application under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

As there were no objections from any interested party, the Board ordered a representation vote to determine whether the applicant should succeed the predecessor union as the collective bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party employer.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 9135

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board proposes abridging time limits for responses to expedite a representation vote for union successor rights.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

The unions agreed that the application would be determined by a representation vote among the employees in the bargaining unit.

To expedite the vote, the Board proposed abridging the usual time limits for filing responses and interventions, directing the parties to advise of any objections by July 30, 2001.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 20123

M. E. Geiger

17 cases1984–2001

Christopher J. Albertyn

Applicant directed to amend OHSA reprisal complaint to add The Hudson Bay Company as responding party.

The applicant filed a reprisal complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act against BBS Building Services Inc. During the hearings, it became clear that The Hudson Bay Company had an interest in the matter and could face liability.

The Board directed the applicant to file an amended application with sufficient particulars and serve it on both BBS and The Bay, adding The Bay as a responding party.

The Board also ordered that the evidence presented thus far be expunged and the case commence afresh.

Wayne Morton v. BBS Building Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 17213

Christopher J. Albertyn

Time abridged for responses and employer directed to provide employee list for representation vote.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a preliminary decision abridging the time for filing responses and interventions.

The Board also directed the responding party employer to provide the names and positions of all employees in the bargaining unit and to advise of any proposals regarding arrangements for a representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 13615

Christopher J. Albertyn

Time for responses abridged and employer directed to provide employee list for representation vote.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor union.

The Board abridged the time for filing responses and interventions and directed the employer to provide the names and positions of all employees in the bargaining unit in preparation for a likely representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 12507

Christopher J. Albertyn

Representation vote ordered in trade union successor rights application under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

The employer took no position on holding a representation vote, provided it was without prejudice to its right to dispute the legal effect of a majority.

The Board ordered a representation vote to determine whether the employees in the voting constituency wished to be represented by the applicant or the predecessor trade union.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 12609

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board abridged time limits for responses and ordered applicant union to produce successor agreements.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of a predecessor trade union.

The Board directed the applicant to provide the employer with a complete copy of the agreements between the unions.

The Board also abridged the time limits for filing responses and interventions, and directed the employer to provide a list of employees in the bargaining unit.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 11117

Adjournment of certification hearing denied despite partial consent to avoid unreasonable delay.

The Carpenters requested an adjournment of three scheduled hearing days for a certification application and an unfair labour practice complaint due to counsel unavailability.

The employer consented, but the Labourers objected.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the adjournment request, noting its policy to only grant adjournments on consent except in exceptional circumstances.

The Board emphasized that certification applications must be dealt with expeditiously, and granting the adjournment would delay the hearing until December 2001, which was deemed unreasonable.

Labourers’ International Union of North America v. O & P Carpentry Limited, 2001 CanLII 13555

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board amends style of cause and corrects previous decision to note employer's response was filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision amending the style of cause to reflect the correct name of the responding party employer, Diversicare VI Limited Partnership Inc. c.o.b.

Chelsey Park Retirement Community – Apartment Complex/Retirement Home.

The Board also amended its previous decision of July 25, 2001, to reflect that the employer had already filed its response.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 220, 2001 CanLII 17385

Christopher J. Albertyn

Representation vote ordered in trade union successor rights application.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

The employer took no position on holding a representation vote, provided it was without prejudice to its right to dispute the legal effect of a majority.

The Board ordered a representation vote to determine whether the employees in the voting constituency wish to be represented by the applicant or the predecessor union.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 12341

Christopher J. Albertyn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 25, 2001

Application adjourned sine die for up to one year on consent of the parties.

The applicant brought an application against the responding employer and the Ministry of Labour.

On agreement of the parties, the Board consented to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

If no party requests to proceed within that time, the application will be deemed terminated.

Sanjay Gandhi v. La Suhaag Indian Restaurant & Bar Ltd., 2001 CanLII 15364

Christopher J. Albertyn