D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 6, 2000

Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board and scheduled hearing cancelled.

The applicant requested to withdraw its applications.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the matters and cancelled the scheduled hearing.

917297 Ontario Limited v. A Better Painter, 2000 CanLII 9619

Duty of fair representation application dismissed; union's failure to seek successful candidate's input before settling grievance not arbitrary.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act.

The union had investigated complaints about a job selection process and filed a grievance, which it later settled with the employer by agreeing to re-run certain positions.

The applicant, who had been successful in the initial selection process, complained that the union acted arbitrarily by not seeking his input before settling the grievance.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the union had conducted a sufficient investigation to establish that the initial complaints were well-founded, and its failure to seek the applicant's input did not constitute a violation of the Act.

Brian Poole v. Power Workers’ Union, CUPE Local 1000-CLC, 2000 CanLII 2073

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 1, 2000

Employees seeking to participate in an ongoing hearing directed to clarify the scope of their requested participation.

In an ongoing proceeding before the Ontario Labour Relations Board, a group of employees represented by an agent indicated their wish to participate.

The Board directed the employees to clarify by 5:00 p.m. that day whether they sought to have the hearing restarted to participate in all aspects, or whether they were content to confine their participation to the remainder of the hearing.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353 v. Volta Electrical Contractors Ltd., 2000 CanLII 10340

G. Pickell

D. L. Gee

A. Haward

Undefended grievance referral allowed; employer ordered to pay $49,920.70 in unpaid benefit contributions.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding party failed to remit benefit contributions.

The responding party did not file a response or attend the hearing.

The Board exercised its discretion to relieve against the strict application of its Rules regarding late service of the referral.

Finding the responding party bound by the collective agreement and in arrears for benefit contributions, the Board directed the responding party to pay $49,920.70 to the applicant.

Universal Workers’ Union, L.I.U.N.A., Local 183 v. 675602 Ontario Ltd., 2000 CanLII 11000

G. Pickell

D. L. Gee

A. Haward

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 506 v. Atlas Corporation, 2000 CanLII 8481

James Robbins

13 cases1998–2001

G. Pickell

D. L. Gee

A. Haward

Undefended construction grievance allowed; employer ordered to pay damages and fees for collective agreement violations.

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

The responding party failed to attend the hearing.

The Board previously found the responding party bound by the Carpenters Provincial Collective Agreement and in violation of it.

Based on the union's evidence regarding unpaid work at a stadium in Oshawa, the Board ordered the responding party to pay $8,368.80 in damages for unpaid wages, plus $1,249 in legal and statutory fees.

Lake Ontario District Council United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Phoenix Restoration, 2000 CanLII 7763

D. L. Gee

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.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Local 446 v. City Acoustics Limited, 2000 CanLII 4018

Mike Failes

4 cases1990–2000

Daniel Randazzo

15 cases1993–2001

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

D. L. Gee

Board confirms applicant's trade union status and issues certificate following successful representation vote.

The applicant filed a displacement application for certification.

The intervenor challenged the applicant's trade union status, arguing it was representing itself as a sister local of another union, had a constitution since 1986 but only recently sought status, and had been inactive for a short period.

The Board dismissed the challenge, relying on a previous decision granting the applicant trade union status and section 113 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

A representation vote was held, and more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant.

The Board directed that a certificate issue to the applicant.

Canadian National Federation of Independent Unions v. Canada Bread Company, Limited, 2000 CanLII 2933

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

D. L. Gee

Representation vote directed in construction industry union certification application.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of at least forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 1669 v. United General Contracting Ltd., 2000 CanLII 2735

D. L. Gee

Duty of fair representation complaint dismissed due to unexplained 11-month delay in filing.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union 11 months after his grievance was dismissed at arbitration.

The union and employer requested that the complaint be dismissed for undue delay.

The applicant failed to file submissions explaining the delay despite being directed to do so by the Board.

The Board applied the factors from City of Mississauga and found the delay to be undue, exercising its discretion to decline to inquire into the complaint.

Tai Nguyen v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2000 CanLII 2373

Murray Klein

22 cases2000–2002

Matthew Moloci

1 case2000–2000

John Barzo

3 cases2000–2020

D. L. Gee

Preliminary objections to Director Order to Pay dismissed; issue estoppel inapplicable.

The applicant, a director of an insolvent company, sought review of a Director Order to Pay for unpaid wages.

She raised two preliminary issues: first, that the Employment Standards Officer lacked authority to issue the order without first issuing one against the employer; and second, that the matter was res judicata because the trustee in bankruptcy had disallowed the employees' claim.

The Board dismissed both preliminary arguments, finding that the Employment Standards Act does not require an order against an insolvent employer as a precondition to director liability, and that issue estoppel did not apply because the trustee's determination under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act involved a different legal question than the one under the Employment Standards Act.

Deborah Frances Boswell v. Winnifred Woods et al, 2000 CanLII 6827

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 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 consent adjournment, noting the matter would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed within that time.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union 800 v. An Mar Mechanical and Electrical Contractors Ltd., 2000 CanLII 4641

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 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 for a period not exceeding one year.

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

The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 46 v. Jack Brooks Painting & Decorating, 2000 CanLII 4343

Philip Wolfenden

6 cases1981–2016

Cyril J. Abbass

4 cases1982–2001

Craig Flood

36 cases1988–2019

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 25, 2000

Employer directed to provide notice of grievance proceedings to employees whose termination the union seeks.

Mid-way through a grievance arbitration hearing, the union indicated it would seek an order terminating the employment of the employer's present employees in the bargaining unit.

The employer asserted the affected employees were entitled to notice.

The Board directed the employer to provide a copy of the decision to the affected employees, outlining the procedure for them to request participation in the hearing.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353 v. Volta Electrical Contractors Ltd., 2000 CanLII 7023

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 23, 2000

Board directed submissions on the effective date of a collective agreement to determine application timeliness.

The applicant union applied to terminate the responding union's bargaining rights under sections 63 and 66 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found the application untimely under section 63.

Under section 66, an issue arose regarding the exact date the collective agreement was entered into, which determines timeliness.

The Board directed the parties to file submissions on the material facts regarding the agreement's effective date and referred the matter to the Registrar to be listed for a one-day hearing.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, 2000 CanLII 10421

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 23, 2000

Request for reconsideration denied as new evidence could have been presented at the original hearing.

The responding party requested a reconsideration of the Board's decision regarding his entitlement to commissions, seeking to introduce new documentary evidence concerning equipment costs.

The Board denied the request, finding that the evidence could have been presented at the original hearing.

The Board also noted that correcting the months considered for sales did not alter the conclusion that equipment costs exceeded the threshold, disentitling him to commissions.

Mister Coffee & Services Inc. v. Matthew Middleton and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 10131

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 20, 2000

Union directed to file submissions on whether employees are entitled to notice of proceedings seeking their termination.

The applicant union advised that it would seek a Board order requiring the responding employer to terminate its current employees.

The employer asserted that the employees were entitled to notice of the proceedings.

The Board directed the union to file submissions on whether the employees are entitled to notice.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353 v. Volta Electrical Contractors Ltd., 2000 CanLII 8678

Murray Klein

22 cases2000–2002

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 18, 2000

Appeal of Director Order to Pay dismissed; directors held liable for unpaid wages of related employer.

The applicants appealed a Director Order to Pay holding them liable as directors for unpaid wages and vacation pay owed to a former employee.

The Employment Standards Officer found that the primary employer and its parent company were related employers under section 12 of the Employment Standards Act.

The applicants, who were directors of the parent company, failed to present evidence or submissions to challenge the related employer finding.

The Board affirmed the Order to Pay, finding the applicants jointly and severally liable for the unpaid wages.

John A. Eversley, Robert Salna and Barry Morton v. Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 4675

D. L. Gee

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 16, 2000

Duty of fair representation application summarily dismissed as union had reasonable basis to drop grievance.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the union violated section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 by refusing to process his grievance through all stages of the grievance procedure.

The Board summarily dismissed the application, noting that a trade union is not required to carry a grievance through all stages and is entitled to consider its merits.

The Board found that the union had a reasonable basis for refusing to advance the grievance beyond Step 1, and the facts pleaded did not establish a violation of the Act.

Piara (Peter) Singh Pannu v. Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada (CEP), Local 564, 2000 CanLII 3676

Melinda Ferlisi

2 cases2000–2000

Laurie Eisenberg

22 cases2000–2001

Jacquie Chic

8 cases2000–2001

D. L. Gee