David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 17, 2000

Application for reconsideration listed for hearing alongside related files without ruling on merits.

The Board directed that an application for reconsideration brought by Giovanni Naccarato be listed for hearing alongside related files.

The Board noted that setting the matter down for hearing did not constitute a ruling on the merits of the applicant's right to bring the application, and that an expert's report filed would likely require the expert to be called as a witness.

The applicant trade union was directed to file a response and granted the right to seek an adjournment to prepare evidence.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 105 v. Wm. J. Davidson Electric Inc., 2000 CanLII 10601

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 10, 2000

Board directs submissions on whether to adjourn direct dealing complaint pending completion of arbitration process.

The applicant union filed an application alleging the responding party college bypassed the union and dealt directly with a grievor regarding wage calculations following a successful arbitration award.

The college requested the Board dismiss the application.

The Board noted that while the facts arguably disclose a violation of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, the union retains control of the arbitration procedure and could return to the arbitrator for a remedy.

The Board directed the parties to file written submissions on whether the application should be adjourned sine die until the arbitration process is exhausted.

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union and its Local 420 v. Loyalist College, 2000 CanLII 11749

Board strikes parties from related employer application but declines to dismiss novel unfair labour practice complaint.

The applicant union filed applications under sections 1(4), 96, and 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that the responding union used its pension fund to set up contractors to undercut bids and secure scaffolding work for its members.

The responding parties brought a motion to dismiss the section 96 application and the section 1(4) application as it related to certain contractors.

The Board struck the contractors and the responding union from the section 1(4) application, finding no facts pleaded to support a related employer declaration based merely on a commercial subcontracting relationship.

However, the Board declined to dismiss the section 96 application, holding that the allegations raised novel legal issues and policy considerations regarding union pension fund investments that should not be dismissed without a full hearing on the merits.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1256 v. Delsan Contracting Limited, 2000 CanLII 12572

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 3, 2000

Extension of time to file briefs granted.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted a request by counsel for the Iron Workers to extend the deadline for filing briefs to October 6, 2000.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 508 v. E.S. Fox Limited, 2000 CanLII 9725

Elizabeth Mitchell

39 cases1988–2007

David Chondon

6 cases1992–2014

Claudio Racco

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 2000

Preliminary motion to dismiss union's section 11 relief request for untimeliness denied; time limits extended.

The responding employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the union's application for reconsideration and request for relief under section 11 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, arguing they were filed outside the Board's time limits.

The union had filed the applications after discovering alleged employer misconduct following the termination of a key union supporter shortly after a certification vote.

The Board dismissed the preliminary motion, finding that while the applications were filed outside the standard time limits, the union had acted with due diligence upon learning of the allegations, and the potential that employer intimidation delayed the reporting of the misconduct warranted relieving against the time limits.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1739 v. N.S.E. 2000 Inc., 2000 CanLII 4074

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 28, 2000

Application adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.

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

The application will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed within that time.

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada, Local 1 v. Neivex Masony Inc., 2000 CanLII 9112

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 28, 2000

Application for certification dismissed after union failed to win majority in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote directed by the Board, not more than fifty percent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed.

The Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further applications for certification by the applicant for the same bargaining unit.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Bayview-Wellington Construction Inc., 2000 CanLII 8605

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 26, 2000

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

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

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

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Local 2486 v. Belrock Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 8378

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 26, 2000

Grievance referral application adjourned sine die following responding party's failure to appear.

The applicant union applied for the referral of a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party failed to file a response or appear at the hearing.

At the applicant's request, the Board adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year, noting that future issues may be decided without notice to the responding party.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Whitby Concrete Finishing Ltd., 2000 CanLII 8695

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 25, 2000

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

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 837 v. Prestressed Systems Inc., 2000 CanLII 3160

T. Hawtin

6 cases1991–2000

M. Gottheil

7 cases1991–2000

J. G. Knight

David A. McKee

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 22, 2000

Board warns non-compliant responding parties that continued failure to produce documents may result in contempt proceedings.

The applicant union brought related employer and sale of business applications against three responding parties.

Two of the responding parties repeatedly failed to comply with the Board's directions to produce documents.

The applicant requested the Board to state a case for contempt to the Divisional Court.

The Board adjourned the hearing because the applicant could not complete its cross-examination without the documents, repeated its production order, and warned the non-compliant parties that further failure to comply or attend would lead the Board to seriously consider stating a case for contempt.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Big “B” Steel Erectors Inc., 2000 CanLII 12331

T. Hawtin

6 cases1991–2000

M. Gottheil

7 cases1991–2000

J. G. Knight

David A. McKee

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 22, 2000

Board revokes prior decision against responding party due to lack of adequate notice.

Spud Erectors Inc. applied for reconsideration of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision, arguing it had not received the prior decision directing compliance.

The Board found that, due to the absence of normal business records indicating delivery by the Board's courier, Spud was not served with the decision.

Citing the basic principle of natural justice that a party must have adequate notice of a decision affecting its rights, the Board granted the reconsideration and revoked the prior decision insofar as it applied to Spud Erectors Inc.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Big “B” Steel Erectors Inc., 2000 CanLII 13371

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 21, 2000

Matter directed to be listed for hearing.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the Registrar to list the matter for hearing.

The Vice-Chair noted he was not seized of the application.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada v. International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers, Local 6, 2000 CanLII 6853

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 20, 2000

Board ordered counting of representation vote ballots, segregated by trade, on agreement of the parties.

In an application for certification, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered, on the agreement of the parties, that the ballots cast in the representation vote be counted.

The vote officer was directed to segregate the ballots cast by bricklayers from those cast by labourers, resulting in two separate counts.

The Board noted that this order did not decide any outstanding legal issues in the application.

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada, Local 1 v. Neivex Masonry Inc., 2000 CanLII 10247

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 20, 2000

Last-minute adjournment request denied due to lack of consent and inability to notify responding party.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a hearing scheduled for the following day.

The request was submitted by fax less than 24 hours before the hearing, without the consent of the responding parties, and without a compelling reason.

The Board denied the request, noting that it would be impossible to communicate the decision to the employee responding party before the hearing commenced.

G.I.T. Security, Monitoring & Communications Ltd. v. Castonguay, 2000 CanLII 11793

R. Sanelli

M. Gottheil

7 cases1991–2000

L. Richmond

10 cases1980–2003

L. Mascarin

J. Freedman

G. Aitken

2 cases2000–2000

D. Jeffries

5 cases2000–2023

D. Eady

6 cases1998–2024

D. Bannon

3 cases1995–2000

C. Peterson

7 cases1983–2023

C. Mosher

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 15, 2000

BACU found to be an independent trade union but not the successor to the OPC.

The Board determined the status of the Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada (BACU) following a dispute with the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (IUBAC).

The IUBAC had purported to revoke the charters of the Ontario Provincial Council (OPC) and several locals.

The BACU claimed it was the transformed OPC or its successor.

The Board found that the BACU could not be the successor to the OPC because the revocation of charters was deemed ineffective under section 147(5) of the Labour Relations Act once a complaint was filed.

Furthermore, the BACU did not meet the statutory definition of an Employee Bargaining Agency.

However, the Board concluded that the BACU and its locals (except Locals 6, 7, and 25) had taken the necessary steps to constitute themselves as independent trade unions within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Act.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Locals 6, 7 and 25 v. Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, 2000 CanLII 12232

Marisa Pollock

85 cases1990–2026

Brian P. Nolan

12 cases1986–2017

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 13, 2000

Union certification granted as employees were performing construction work not covered by existing maintenance agreement.

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

The responding party argued that the employees who cast ballots were not performing construction work and were covered by an existing collective agreement with SEIU Local 210.

The Board found that the employees were erecting a permanent steel stud wall, which constitutes construction work, not maintenance.

The Board also determined that the SEIU collective agreement only covered maintenance work and therefore did not bar the application.

As more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Board ordered the issuance of certificates for the industrial, commercial, and institutional sector and all other sectors in the relevant geographic area.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Local 494 v. Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board, 2000 CanLII 12424

J. G. Knight

David A. McKee

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2000

Board scheduled a reconsideration request for hearing and declined to issue a production order.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board addressed a request for reconsideration from Spud Erectors Inc. and a request for a production order from the applicant union.

The Board rescheduled the applications to hear the reconsideration request first and directed Spud Erectors Inc. to deliver its application to the union.

The Board declined to issue a production order, noting that such orders are rarely made in a referral under section 133 and that the applicant could serve a subpoena duces tecum instead.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Big “B” Steel Erectors Inc., 2000 CanLII 11719

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2000

Application for reconsideration denied; correction of witness employment status did not change adverse inference.

The responding party applied for reconsideration of a Board decision, arguing that the Board incorrectly stated a potential witness was still employed by the responding party.

The Board accepted that it misinterpreted the witness's employment status but noted that the witness was still available to be called.

The Board concluded that the adverse inference drawn from the failure to call the witness remained valid.

The application for reconsideration was denied, except to correct the factual statement regarding the witness's employment.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Bayview-Wellington Construction Inc., 2000 CanLII 11771

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

David A. McKee