David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 13, 2001

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year, having regard to the agreement of the parties.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Locals 6, 7 and 25 v. Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, 2001 CanLII 11437

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 12, 2001

Board directs applicant to file submissions on responding parties' motion to dismiss unfair labour practice application.

The applicant union filed an unfair labour practice application alleging violations of sections 5 and 76 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding parties moved to dismiss the application for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board directed the applicant to file written submissions addressing specific jurisdictional and labour relations issues before ruling on the motion to dismiss.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Allied Construction Employees Local 1030, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, 2001 CanLII 10827

Intervenor status granted and production of documents ordered in consolidated certification and unfair labour practice applications.

In these consolidated applications for certification and an unfair labour practice complaint, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued an interim decision addressing preliminary matters.

The Board granted intervenor status to the Labourers' Employee Bargaining Agency, Labourers Local 183, and the Masonry Contractors Association of Toronto.

The Board also ordered the production of various documents relating to the relationship between Bricklayers' Local 1 and Labourers' Local 183, and set the order of issues to be determined at the upcoming hearings.

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada Local 1 v. Del Gant Construction Limited, 2001 CanLII 3007

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 8, 2001

Union's certification application dismissed after admitting it lacked 40% membership evidence.

The applicant union advised the Board that it had underestimated the number of persons in the bargaining unit and filed membership evidence on behalf of less than 40% of them.

The applicant requested that the application be dismissed pursuant to section 8.1(5), paragraph 7 of the Labour Relations Act.

The responding party and intervenor agreed, and neither requested a bar under section 111(2)(k).

The Board dismissed the application and ordered the destruction of the ballots cast in the representation vote.

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada Local 1 v. Avenue Structures Inc., 2001 CanLII 18669

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 7, 2001

Board directed applicants to advise if they wish to proceed with the remainder of their application.

Following a previous decision dealing with allegations of a violation of section 149, the Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the applicants to advise whether they wished to proceed with the remainder of their application.

The applicants were given until July 6, 2001 to respond, failing which the application would be deemed terminated.

Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers v. International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, 2001 CanLII 19943

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 4, 2001

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted a consent request to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

If neither party requests to proceed within that time, the applications will be deemed terminated.

IWA Canada v. Beaumen Waste Management Systems Ltd., 2001 CanLII 13337

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 4, 2001

Board declines to dismiss unfair labour practice complaint but orders applicant to provide further particulars.

The applicant union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging that the responding employer and a rival union conspired to gerrymander the list of employees at work on the date of a certification application.

The responding parties requested that the application be dismissed for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board declined to dismiss the application, finding it raised an arguable case, but struck out certain scandalous and vexatious pleadings and directed the applicant to file a revised schedule providing specific particulars of the alleged conspiracy and statements.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Allied Construction Employees Local 1030, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and Fernbrook Homes Ltd., 2001 CanLII 13462

David A. McKee

Board directs responding parties to file response within 10 days due to procedural confusion.

The applicant requested that the Board deem the responding parties to have accepted all facts alleged in the application due to their failure to file a response.

The Board noted that recent correspondence from the Board may have caused confusion regarding whether the matter was proceeding to a hearing in the normal course or if the applicant was seeking immediate relief.

Consequently, the Board directed the responding parties to file a response within 10 days, after which the applicant's motion would be considered if no response was filed.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Daniel McLean, 2001 CanLII 6288

David A. McKee

Certificate issued to union following successful representation vote in construction industry.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statement of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board directed that a certificate issue to the applicant for the specified bargaining unit of carpenters and construction labourers.

Allied Construction Employees Local 1030, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Georgian Group Inc., 2001 CanLII 13302

David A. McKee

Union decertified following representation vote where majority of employees voted in opposition.

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

Following a representation vote in which more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

Marc Lefebvre v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local Union No. 47, 2001 CanLII 10304

David A. McKee

Board affirmed decision to postpone issuing certification pending resolution of constitutional jurisdiction issue.

The responding party employer argued that the Board was required under section 10(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to immediately issue a certificate after the applicant union won a representation vote.

The Board rejected this argument, noting that a certificate cannot issue when other issues, such as constitutional jurisdiction, remain unresolved.

The Board affirmed its earlier decision to postpone determining the constitutional jurisdiction issue until a later date.

Canadian Telephone Employees Association v. Certen Inc., 2001 CanLII 19517

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 31, 2001

Hearing cancelled on consent and schedule set for written submissions on list issues.

The Board cancelled the hearing set for May 31, 2001, based on the agreement of the parties.

The parties were directed to file submissions regarding list issues by June 7, 2001, after which the application would be referred to the Manager of Field Services.

Allied Construction Employees, Local 1030, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. National Homes, 2001 CanLII 9428

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 30, 2001

Board refused to stay its previous order pending judicial review and directed immediate compliance.

The Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (OPC) and the Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada (BACU) failed to comply with the Board's May 2, 2001 direction, indicating an intent to seek judicial review.

The Board noted that an application for judicial review does not automatically stay its decisions and directed the parties to comply with the previous order.

The Board also indicated a willingness to extend the August 31, 2001 deadline for union membership applications once the required notices could be delivered.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Locals 6, 7 and 25 v. Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, 2001 CanLII 10043

M. Lewis

11 cases1991–2001

L. Richmond

9 cases1980–2001

D. Watson

4 cases2000–2001

D. Leone

3 cases2000–2001

D. Defrancesco

3 cases2000–2001

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 30, 2001

Board directed notice of certification and unfair labour practice proceedings to potentially affected third parties.

The Board heard preliminary matters regarding three applications for certification by Bricklayers Local 1 and an unfair labour practice complaint by the Carpenters' Union.

The Board directed that notice of the proceedings be given to four additional parties (Labourers' Employee Bargaining Agency, Labourers' Employer Bargaining Agency, Masonry Council of Unions Toronto and Vicinity, and Masonry Contractors Association of Toronto and Vicinity) whose rights might be affected by the outcome of the issues raised, including the status of Bricklayers Local 1.

A further hearing was scheduled to determine intervenor status and the order of proceedings.

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada Local 1 v. Del Gant Construction Limited, 2001 CanLII 12810

David A. McKee

Board adjourns certification application pending outcome of related federal jurisdiction proceedings before the CIRB.

The applicant union applied for certification under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, but raised the issue of whether the employment relationship falls within federal or provincial jurisdiction.

The applicant requested that the Board defer final consideration of the application until proceedings before the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) were complete.

The responding party argued that the Board must issue a certificate as a representation vote had been conducted and a majority voted in favour of the applicant.

The Board decided to adjourn the hearing into the constitutional issue and hold the matter in abeyance for a limited period, directing the applicant to advise on the status of the CIRB application.

Canadian Telephone Employees Association v. Certen Inc., 2001 CanLII 17029

David A. McKee

Request to add a responding party dismissed due to applicant's failure to file reply submissions.

The applicant requested to add Sager Drywall Ltd. as a responding party to the application.

One of the responding parties, Andan Drywall Ltd., filed submissions opposing the request.

The applicant failed to reply to these submissions despite being directed to do so by the Board.

In the absence of any submissions from the applicant, the Board dismissed the request to add the new responding party.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Lisi Brothers Construction Limited, 2001 CanLII 8116

J. G. Knight

OLRB0 cases1998–2001

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

David A. McKee

Certification application dismissed after union failed to win representation vote on agreed voters list.

The applicant union filed an application for certification and a section 96 unfair labour practice application.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing to a specific voters list and the withdrawal of the section 96 application.

Based on the agreed voters list, the representation vote resulted in not more than 50% of the ballots cast in favour of the applicant.

Consequently, the Board dismissed the certification application and noted the withdrawal of the section 96 application.

Allied Construction Employees Local 1030 v. C & T Framing Inc., 2001 CanLII 4243

David A. McKee

Board directed a consultation to resolve disputed facts regarding a duty of fair representation complaint.

The applicant filed submissions regarding her employment status and right to grieve her discharge.

The Board found the submissions unhelpful as they did not respond to previously identified issues or provide the relevant collective agreement.

However, noting disputed factual issues regarding the union's actions even if the applicant was a temporary employee, the Board directed the Registrar to list the matter for a one-day consultation and ordered the responding party to file the relevant collective agreement.

Brenda Currine Perrin v. Ontario Public Service Staff Union, 2001 CanLII 6588

David A. McKee

Board orders production of work records and defers consideration of related file.

The Board issued a procedural direction in an application involving the applicant, the union, and the intervenor employer.

The responding party withdrew its objection regarding improper delivery, leading the Board to defer consideration of one file until the conclusion of the other pursuant to section 111(3)(b).

The Board ordered the intervenor to produce all records relating to the performance of work covered by the collective agreement on specific dates, and directed the Registrar to list the matter for a two-day hearing.

Tony Monaco v. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers et al., 2001 CanLII 13427

Mark Wright

43 cases1993–2022

Gary Caroline

26 cases1988–2012

Claude Cournoyer

4 cases1998–2001

Bruce McNamara

2 cases2000–2001

Aaron Murphy

3 cases1998–2001

David A. McKee