David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 26, 2000

Applications withdrawn at the request of the applicants.

The applicants requested to withdraw their applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted the request and the applications were withdrawn.

Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 473 v. Jannock Limited, 2000 CanLII 7872

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2000

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

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

The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

United Steelworkers of America and its Local 7155 v. Waterloo Furniture Components Ltd., 2000 CanLII 8127

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2000

Union's preliminary request to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint denied; full response ordered.

The applicant filed an application alleging that her union breached its duty of fair representation.

The union filed a brief response requesting that the application be dismissed on various grounds, including timeliness.

The Board declined to dismiss the application at this preliminary stage, noting that the union's response lacked the detail required by the Board's rules and that the application itself did not conclusively establish that it was untimely.

The Board directed the union to file a full and complete response, and directed the applicant to subsequently file a reply.

Mary Doughlin v. Hotel Employees, Restaurant Employees Union, Local 75, 2000 CanLII 12218

Grievance referrals withdrawn following settlement between the parties.

The parties advised the Ontario Labour Relations Board that the grievances subject to three referrals had been settled.

They requested the proceedings be terminated.

The Board treated the grievances as settled and the referrals as withdrawn, noting that the settlement also encompassed other Board files.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v. Associated Contracting Inc., 2000 CanLII 6573

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 24, 2000

Board directs Registrar to schedule application for a consultation.

The applicant filed an application against the Ontario Nurses' Association.

The Board reviewed the submissions and directed the Registrar to schedule the application for a consultation, noting that it was not satisfied on the basis of the applicant's material alone that there was no basis for the relief sought.

The Board directed the applicant to be prepared to address the advice sought and given by the union in late 1997, and to provide written notice of any unpleaded contact with the union between late 1997 and September 1998.

Marie L. Murchison v. Ontario Nurses’ Association, 2000 CanLII 13306

Maria McDonald

Practising Law - Employed7 cases2000–2016

James Fyshe

32 cases1981–2011

F. R. von Veh

5 cases1980–2000

Andra Pollak

10 cases1981–2001

Alick Ryder

33 cases1980–2011

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 24, 2000

Interim relief to suspend rival union's collective agreement and consolidate files denied; expedited hearing granted.

The applicant union (IWA) sought interim relief in relation to its pending related employer/sale of business and unfair labour practice applications against the responding employers and a rival union (CMEU).

The IWA requested consolidation of the files, expedited hearings, suspension of the CMEU's collective agreement, dues held in trust, bargaining orders, and access to employees.

The Board granted the request to expedite the hearings but dismissed all other requests for interim relief, finding that the requested orders were either substantive rather than procedural, unnecessary to preserve the status quo, or inappropriate given the Board's remedial powers at the conclusion of the litigation.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada, Local 700 v. Wilson’s Truck Lines Limited, 2000 CanLII 13058

L. Eisenberg

29 cases2000–2001

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 10, 2000

Employer's application for review dismissed; employee's medical absence did not constitute job abandonment or wilful neglect.

The applicant employer sought review of an Order to Pay termination pay to the responding party employee.

The employer argued the employee had abandoned her job or, alternatively, was guilty of wilful neglect of duty due to prolonged medical absences.

The Board found that the employee did not form the subjective intent or take objective steps to quit her employment.

Furthermore, the employee's absences were caused by a medical condition and did not constitute wilful neglect of duty.

The Board also noted that the employer had condoned the absences by failing to warn the employee that her job was in jeopardy.

The application was dismissed and the Order to Pay was confirmed.

849057 Ontario Ltd. o/a Roy’s Enterprise v. Munroe, 2000 CanLII 11817

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 5, 2000

Application adjourned sine die, to be deemed terminated if not brought back within one year.

The applicant brought an application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board ordered the application adjourned sine die, with the condition that it may be brought back on for hearing on twenty-four hours' notice to counsel for the responding parties.

If no such request is made within one year, the application will be deemed terminated.

Lafarge Canada Inc. v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local 230, 2000 CanLII 7758

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 5, 2000

Board directed applicant to identify nurses in specific unit and ordered union to provide necessary documents.

The applicant filed submissions identifying seven part-time nurses at Windsor Regional Hospital, but the Board could not determine if any worked in the Chronic Care Unit, which was the area the applicant wished to work in.

The Board directed the applicant to clarify which of the identified nurses worked in the Chronic Care Unit and ordered the responding union to provide the applicant with the necessary assistance and documents to answer the question.

Marie L. Murchison v. Ontario Nurses Association, 2000 CanLII 12693

David A. McKee

Application for judicial review does not operate as a stay of the Board's pre-hearing production decisions.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision reminding the responding parties that their application for judicial review of previous decisions concerning pre-hearing production does not operate as a stay of those decisions.

The Registrar was directed to set one day of hearing, and the responding parties were reminded of their obligation to adduce all relevant facts.

Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Innovative Flooring Inc. and Regency Flooring, 2000 CanLII 12954

David A. McKee

Adjournment request denied; interim application to proceed as scheduled despite counsel unavailability.

The responding parties requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing dates for interim applications due to the unavailability of counsel.

The applicant opposed the request.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the adjournment, noting that interim applications are scheduled on short notice and availability of counsel is generally not a reason for adjourning a proceeding that has not yet commenced.

The Board directed that the matter proceed on the first scheduled date, but cancelled the second date as interim applications do not involve calling evidence and should take less than a day to argue.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada, Local 700 v. Wilson’s Truck Lines Limited, 2000 CanLII 13219

David A. McKee

Motion to dismiss related employer application for lack of prima facie case denied.

The applicant union filed applications under sections 1(4) and 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, along with referrals of grievances to arbitration under section 133.

One of the responding parties brought a motion to dismiss the application for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board dismissed the motion, noting that in related employer and sale of business applications, the union has limited knowledge of the facts, which lie within the exclusive knowledge of the responding parties.

The Board found that the applicant had gone beyond the minimum required in providing particulars and had stated sufficient facts to enable the Board to grant the relief sought.

The grievance referrals were adjourned sine die pending the outcome of the main application.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Lisi Brothers Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 13232

G. Pickell

David A. McKee

A. Haward

Application adjourned pending determination of union's status in related proceedings.

The applicant union filed an application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The remaining issue in the application was the status of the applicant, which was currently being litigated in other Board files.

The Board adjourned the application until a decision on the applicant's status was rendered in the related files.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Local 20 v. Sonterlan Corporation, 2000 CanLII 9278

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 2, 2000

Board finds employer liable for collective agreement violations after failure to respond to grievance referral.

The applicant referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend within the required time.

Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the Board deemed the responding party to have accepted all facts stated in the application.

The Board found the responding party liable for violating the collective agreements by employing non-union members.

A hearing was scheduled to assess damages.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Country Drywall 2000 Corp., 2000 CanLII 8264

G. Pickell

David A. McKee

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 2, 2000

Board ordered hearing dates and document production regarding the employment status of three individuals.

The applicant union sought a determination regarding the employment status of three individuals.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the Registrar to set two days of hearing to hear evidence and argument on the issue.

The Board also ordered the responding party to deliver all relevant documents concerning the work performed and payments made to the individuals within fifteen days.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 586 v. Comco Electric Limited, 2000 CanLII 6282

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 1, 2000

Employer barred from challenging employee status after agreeing to their inclusion and counting of ballots.

In an application for certification, the responding party employer sought to challenge the status of two employees it had previously agreed were in the bargaining unit, after the representation vote had been held and their ballots counted.

The employer argued they were not apprentices under the Trades Qualification and Apprenticeship Act.

The Board dismissed the request, holding that parties cannot resile from agreements made during the pre-certification process, as doing so would undermine the expedition and finality required in certification applications.

The Board directed a hearing to determine the status of one remaining employee whose ballot had been segregated.

I.B.E.W. Construction Council of Ontario v. JLY Electric Ltd., 2000 CanLII 12962

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 1, 2000

Board directed applicant to make submissions on timeliness of its application for review.

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

The Board extended the time limit for filing the application to October 19, 1999, because the Ministry's form contained incorrect information.

However, the application itself was not submitted until March 22, 2000.

The Board directed the applicant to make written submissions regarding the date of filing and why the time limit should be further extended.

Rich-Wood Kitchens Limited v. Lupa, 2000 CanLII 12289

G. Pickell

David A. McKee

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 28, 2000

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant requested that its application be withdrawn.

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

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Industry Drywall Systems Ltd., 2000 CanLII 7664

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

David A. McKee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 28, 2000

Default judgment entered against responding party for collective agreement violations; damages to be assessed.

The applicant referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend within the required time.

Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the responding party was deemed to have accepted all facts stated in the application.

The Board found the responding party liable for violating the collective agreement by employing non-union members or subcontracting to a non-union contractor.

A hearing was scheduled to assess damages.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Metal Tech Systems Inc., 2000 CanLII 7499

G. Pickell

David A. McKee

A. Haward