Christopher J. Albertyn

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw his application against Makkinga Contracting and the Ministry of Labour.

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

Earl v. Makkinga Contracting, 2001 CanLII 5652

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board provisionally abridged time limits for responses to expedite a representation vote for successor union 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 a predecessor trade union.

The applicant and the predecessor union agreed that the application would be determined by a representation vote among the employees in the bargaining unit.

Given this agreement, the Board considered it prudent to abridge the usual time limit for filing responses and interventions to expedite the vote.

The Board directed the responding parties and interested employees to advise if they objected to the abridgement of time limits.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 12116

Board orders representation vote and seals ballot box pending dispute over number of employees in bargaining unit.

The applicant union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit, arguing there was only one employee at work on the application date and giving notice under section 8.1 of the Act.

The Board deferred the determination of the number of employees to a future hearing and ordered a representation vote to proceed.

The ballot box was ordered sealed pending the resolution of the dispute.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Queensgate Homes, 2001 CanLII 21039

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application for review of Employment Standards Act orders dismissed for untimeliness without reasonable explanation.

The applicant filed an application for review of two Orders to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The application to review the first order was massively untimely with no satisfactory explanation.

The application to review the second order was filed one day late, but the applicant provided no explanation for the delay.

The Board declined to extend the time limits and dismissed the application as untimely.

Whitman Engineering Limited v. Cheryle Baker, 2001 CanLII 2965

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application for review of an order to pay resolved by Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant employer sought a review of an order to pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $166.40 paid to the employee and a $100 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The matter was deemed terminated subject to the Ministry of Labour's right to request a hearing within ten days.

Doug’s Snowplowing and Equipment Rentals v. Nathan Armstrong and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 5452

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board provisionally abridged time limits for responses to expedite a union 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.

To expedite the vote, the Board provisionally abridged the time limit for filing responses and interventions, directing the parties to advise of any objections by the following day.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 183, 2001 CanLII 13296

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application for review terminated after employer failed to file proper forms within extended time limit.

The employer sought an application for review of an Order to Pay but failed to use the proper form.

The Board provided the correct forms and granted a 10-day extension to file properly.

The employer failed to file the application within the extended time limit.

The Board terminated the matter.

Behar Cline Manufacturing Ltd. v. Pinter, 2001 CanLII 16674

Christopher J. Albertyn

Employer found liable for collective agreement violations in default grievance referral.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer failed to make proper remittances and pay correct wages.

The employer failed to file a response or notice of intent to defend.

Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the Board deemed the facts in the application accepted and found the employer liable for violating the collective agreement.

The Board ordered compliance and payment of the filing fee, and scheduled a hearing to assess damages.

Construction Workers Local 53, CLAC v. Ben Bruinsma & Sons Limited, 2001 CanLII 6306

Christopher J. Albertyn

Employment standards application terminated following confidential settlement between the parties.

The applicant filed an application under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties subsequently entered into confidential Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board terminated the matter.

Brian Bowles v. Directory Distributing Associates Ltd., 2001 CanLII 13195

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board directed applicant to explain calculation of requested security amount before granting default decision.

The applicant union referred a construction grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and requested a default decision as the responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend.

The Board noted that the applicant was in a position to obtain a default decision but directed the applicant to explain how the requested security amount of $47,217.95 was calculated before the Board would issue the default decision.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675 v. Eastern Drywall & Acoustics Limited, 2001 CanLII 12072

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board directs representation vote in construction industry certification application after employer fails to respond.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and an affiliated bargaining agent, and that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken.

Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Thermo Design Insulation Ltd., 2001 CanLII 7853

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application for review terminated after employer failed to file using the proper form.

The employer attempted to file an application for review under the Employment Standards Act but failed to use the proper form.

The Board notified the employer and provided a 10-day extension to file correctly.

The employer did not respond within the extended time.

The Board terminated the matter.

Compass Group Canada v. Rea, 2001 CanLII 14598

Christopher J. Albertyn

Grievance referral adjourned sine die on consent for up to one year.

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the grievance referral 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 request to proceed is made.

United Association of Journeypersons and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 787 v. Prime Air Control Inc., 2001 CanLII 8284

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board abridges time for responses and orders employer to provide employee list for union succession 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 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 14139

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application for review of an Order to Pay dismissed as untimely without a satisfactory explanation.

The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The application was filed late, and the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.

Although the Ministry's collection agency had collected the full amount owing, the Board found no good reason to extend the time for filing.

The application was dismissed as untimely.

1372715 Ontario Inc., Niagara Shoe Manufacturing v. Kari Reid, 2001 CanLII 19739

Christopher J. Albertyn

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

The Board abridged the time limits for filing responses and interventions over the employer's objection, finding that a representation vote should be held as expeditiously as possible.

The employer was directed to provide a list of employees in the bargaining unit and post the decision.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 16328

Christopher J. Albertyn

Union directed to provide particulars for allegations of employer initiation in termination applications.

Two applications were filed to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding union.

Representation votes were held, but the union challenged the employee status of the individuals who cast ballots and alleged that the employer initiated the applications under section 63(16) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found the union's allegations of employer initiation lacked sufficient particulars and directed the union to provide proper particulars or file an unfair labour practice complaint under section 96 for post-application conduct.

The dispute over the voters' employee status was referred to a hearing.

Geldart v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183, 2001 CanLII 13540

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw her application.

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

Mary Lou Elliott v. Machan Hardware Ltd. and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 7983

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board directs applicant to explain calculation of $50,000 security request before granting default judgment.

The applicant union referred a construction grievance to the Board and requested a default decision after the responding party failed to file a Notice of Intent to Defend.

The Board noted that the applicant was in a position to obtain a default decision, but directed the applicant to advise how the requested security amount of $50,000.00 was calculated before the request could be processed.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Industry Drywall Solutions Ltd., 2001 CanLII 17953

Christopher J. Albertyn