D. A. Patterson

D. A. Patterson

Board issues consent declarations regarding successor employer status and bargaining rights following a sale of business.

The applicant union brought an application under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement settling all outstanding issues.

The Board issued declarations on consent, finding that a sale of business had taken place and that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo was the successor employer.

The Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit, declared the applicant as the bargaining agent, and terminated the bargaining rights of the responding union.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and is Local 4304 v. Regional Municipality of Waterloo, 2000 CanLII 1299

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in application for certification.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit.

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

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Tracelogix, 2000 CanLII 10805

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in certification application with ballot box sealed due to bargaining unit dispute.

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

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in its proposed bargaining unit.

Due to a dispute over the bargaining unit description, the Board directed a representation vote using the employer's proposed voting constituency, with disputed positions casting segregated ballots.

As the employer filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board ordered the ballot box sealed pending further order.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Smith Packaging Limited, 2000 CanLII 6953

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in application for certification.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, 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 and established the voting constituency, with directions for segregating ballots of disputed positions.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Evangeline Residence (Division of Salvation Army), 2000 CanLII 8326

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Declaration granted confirming applicant union acquired predecessor's rights via merger or transfer of jurisdiction.

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

The application was unopposed.

The Board granted the application and issued the requested declaration.

Service Employees International Union Local, 204 v. Service Employees International Union, Local 478, 2000 CanLII 9186

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.

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

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 837 v. SMS Modern Building Cleaning Services, 2000 CanLII 6465

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Board directs representation vote in union certification application after finding sufficient membership evidence.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification to represent employees of the responding party at two worksites.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, 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.

The responding party filed a notice under section 8.1 but failed to file a complete response, so the Board could not determine if there was a numerically relevant dispute regarding the number of employees.

The ballots will be counted in a manner permitting separate counts for the proposed units.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Beaver Foods Limited, 2000 CanLII 9159

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in application for termination of bargaining rights.

The applicant applied under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty percent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Tim Rancourt v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175, 2000 CanLII 8655

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Board directs representation vote for part-time employees and orders ballot box sealed due to disputes.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent part-time 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.

Due to a dispute over the inclusion of certain positions and a section 8.1 notice from the employer regarding the number of employees in the unit, the Board ordered the ballot box sealed pending further order or agreement.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Ottawa Regional Hospital Linen Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 10354

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

Termination application dismissed for failing to meet 40 percent threshold; particulars ordered for related ULP complaint.

The applicants filed two related applications: one to terminate the union's bargaining rights and another alleging unfair labour practices by the employer.

The applicants acknowledged they lacked the required 40 percent support for termination but claimed the employer's conduct caused the loss of 90 signatures.

The Board dismissed the termination application, finding it lacked statutory authority to direct a vote without meeting the 40 percent threshold.

The Board directed the applicants to provide further particulars regarding the unfair labour practice complaint before ruling on the union's request to dismiss it without a hearing.

Greensides v. Maple Lodge Farms Ltd., 2000 CanLII 6216

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

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

The parties agreed to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The Board consented to the adjournment, noting that the matter would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed within that time.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, CLC, Local 28-0 v. Dupont Canada Inc., 2000 CanLII 10342

J. A. Rundle

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

D. A. Patterson

Union decertified after majority of employees vote in opposition during representation vote.

The applicant employee applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.

Larry Antonyshyn v. U.F.C.W., 2000 CanLII 7168

J. A. Rundle

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

D. A. Patterson

Unopposed application for a declaration of successor trade union rights granted.

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

Notice was provided to the responding party employer and the predecessor union, and notices were posted in the workplace.

No statements of opposition were filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the application and issued the requested declaration.

Service Employees International Union, Local 204 v. Service Employees International Union, Local 478, 2000 CanLII 10442

Marilyn Silverman

OLRB0 cases2000–2001

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

Union certified as bargaining agent following a successful representation vote by employees.

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the bargaining unit appropriate and directed that a certificate issue to the applicant.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. Village of Riverside Glen, 2000 CanLII 10511

J. A. Rundle

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

D. A. Patterson

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

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the applications sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matters would be deemed terminated if no request to proceed was made.

Teamsters Local Union No. 879 v. Evenflo Inc., 2000 CanLII 9239

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 13, 2000

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party employer.

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

Office & Professional Employees’ International Union, Local 225 v. Maison Baldwin House, 2000 CanLII 7286

Mark A. Stone

12 cases2000–2013

Cynthia D. Watson

7 cases1993–2013

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 12, 2000

Employer committed unfair labour practices but did not initiate termination application or bargain in bad faith.

The union filed unfair labour practice complaints alleging the employer engaged in anti-union animus, including suspending the union president, interfering with a lease agreement, and failing to follow collective agreement discipline procedures.

A separate application was filed by employees to terminate the union's bargaining rights, which the union argued was employer-initiated.

The Board found the employer violated sections 70 and 72 of the Labour Relations Act regarding the suspension, lease termination, and discipline administration, awarding damages.

However, the Board dismissed the bad faith bargaining allegations regarding the cessation of union dues collection and service fee increases during a legal strike/lockout position.

The Board also found insufficient evidence of employer initiation or interference in the termination application and ordered the segregated ballots to be counted.

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1703 v. McDonnell-Ronald Limousine Service Limited, 2000 CanLII 8638

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 12, 2000

Board grants union leave to amend response and directs production of requested job descriptions.

The union requested leave to amend its response and sought production of specific job descriptions for the position of Systems Manager/Head Technical Services.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to amend the response and directed the applicant to either produce the requested job descriptions or provide reasons why they should not be produced.

Milton Public Library Board v. Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 932, 2000 CanLII 2315

Mark A. Stone

12 cases2000–2013

Cynthia D. Watson

7 cases1993–2013

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Bram Herlich