D. A. Patterson

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Board orders representation vote for Comfort Inn employees following union certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees at a Comfort Inn in Pickering, Ontario.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that the parties agreed on the appropriate bargaining unit.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

U.F.C.W. Local 333 v. Comfort Inn, 2001 CanLII 7985

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Request for extension of time to file response to certification application denied.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

The responding party employer sought an extension of time until mid-May to file its response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the request, noting that subsection 8(5) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 contemplates representation votes being held within five days, which necessitates quick responses from responding parties.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Great Beginnings Child Centred Co-Operative, 2001 CanLII 3229

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

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

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and determined that the proposed bargaining unit was appropriate.

Although the responding party disputed the union's estimate of the number of employees and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the majority of the Board found the numerical difference insignificant and directed a representation vote without sealing the ballot box.

A dissenting Board member would have directed the ballot box to be sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Marks Lumber Limited, 2001 CanLII 10597

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRB orders representation vote for security guards without sealing ballot box despite employer's section 8.1 notice.

The United Steelworkers of America applied for certification to represent employees of Garda Security Group Inc. The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The majority of the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the applicant established sufficient membership support and ordered a representation vote without sealing the ballot box.

Board Member Ronson dissented, arguing that section 8.1(4) required the ballot box to be sealed.

United Steelworkers of America v. Garda Security Group Inc., 2001 CanLII 15093

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Representation vote directed in displacement application for union certification.

The applicant trade union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite 40% membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A. Canada) v. Royal Homes Limited, 2001 CanLII 16885

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Board directs representation vote for agreed bargaining unit despite dispute over employee estimate.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties agreed on the appropriate bargaining unit.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Act, but agreed the ballots should be counted.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the agreed-upon voting constituency.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. Toronto Bagel – Canada Bread, 2001 CanLII 9113

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Board directed parties to advise if they wish to proceed with adjourned application or face termination.

The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

After multiple adjournments and a failure by the parties to respond to the Registrar's request for a status update, the Board directed the parties to advise whether they wished to proceed by a specified date, failing which the application would be terminated.

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79 v. The Board of Governors of the Riverdale Hospital, 2001 CanLII 8077

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Copper Terrace Nursing Home, 2001 CanLII 18917

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Representation vote directed for proposed bargaining unit of part-time employees after employer failed to respond.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent part-time employees of the responding party.

The responding party did not file a response.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, 2001 CanLII 21051

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board on consent of the parties.

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

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Peggy L. Flack v. AMK Metal Products, 2001 CanLII 19036

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Representation vote ordered in certification application; ballot box not sealed despite employer's section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate and that the numerical difference between the parties' estimates was not significant.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, with disputed ballots to be segregated.

A dissenting member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. G.F.I. Control Systems Inc., 2001 CanLII 12477

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Board directed applicant to file further submissions to establish trade union status and clarify vote discrepancies.

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 its predecessor by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

The Board noted that it had not previously found the applicant to be a trade union and that the filed materials did not assist in making that determination.

Furthermore, the Board identified discrepancies in the evidence regarding the membership vote and the number of employees in the bargaining units.

The Board directed the applicant to file further submissions and materials to clarify these issues and establish its trade union status before making the requested declaration.

Service Employees International Union Local 528 v. Service Employees International Union Local 210, 2001 CanLII 5109

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Board directed applicant to file further materials proving trade union status and adequate notice of merger 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 its predecessor by reason of a merger.

The Board noted deficiencies in the application, including an unsigned Confirmation of Posting, lack of clarity regarding notice to bargaining unit members of the merger vote, and the absence of a prior Board finding that the applicant is a trade union.

The Board directed the employer to file a completed Confirmation of Posting and ordered the applicant to file further submissions and materials regarding notice and its trade union status.

Service Employees International Union Local 528 v. Service Employees International Union Local 639, 2001 CanLII 2729

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Representation vote ordered for proposed bargaining unit of Participation House employees.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification to represent employees of Participation House, Waterloo Region.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

Canadian Union of Operating Engineers and General Workers v. Participation House, Waterloo Region, 2001 CanLII 21050

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 27, 2001

Applicant directed to file materials proving trade union status before successor rights declaration can issue.

The applicant applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

Following successful representation votes, the Board noted that it had not previously found the applicant to be a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Act.

The Board directed the applicant to file materials in support of its claim that it is a trade union before making a final determination.

Service Employees International Union Local 528 v. Service Employees International Union Local 204, 2001 CanLII 3758

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 26, 2001

Application withdrawn with leave and continuation dates scheduled for remaining matters.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the applicant leave to withdraw the application in Board File No. 2910-99-U. The Board also scheduled continuation dates for the remaining matters in August, October, and November 2001.

United Steelworkers of America v. CPI Plastics Group Ltd., 2001 CanLII 2711

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 25, 2001

Board advised parties to request Minister to withdraw reference following their agreement to withdraw.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Board under section 3(2) of the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act.

The parties subsequently entered into an agreement purporting to withdraw the matter, but the Minister had not yet withdrawn the reference.

The Board advised the parties to request the Minister to withdraw the reference, noting that if the Minister does so, the Board will not consider the matter further.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Lifecare Management Inc. c.o.b. Marsdale Retirement Residence, 2001 CanLII 16857

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 25, 2001

Request to reconsider decision allowing transfer of membership evidence from withdrawn certification application denied.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Board decision that permitted the transfer of membership evidence from an earlier, withdrawn certification application to a new application.

The applicant argued that the new application was not 'accompanied' by the required evidence, precluding a finding of forty percent support.

The Board declined to reconsider, affirming its long-standing practice of allowing such transfers upon a trade union's request.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Ryerson Polytechnic University, 2001 CanLII 4781

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson