Gail Misra

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

The parties subsequently reached Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board ordered the application terminated.

The applicant filed an application against the responding party.

Having regard to the Minutes of Settlement reached between the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave for the application to be withdrawn.

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

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to obtain a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the voting constituency, with segregated ballots for disputed positions.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board determined 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 among the eligible employees in the agreed-upon voting constituency.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The responding party employer disputed the applicant's estimate of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and proposed three different bargaining units, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Two intervenor unions objected to the application on the grounds that applications had already been filed under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

The Board found the applicant established sufficient membership support and ordered a representation vote.

Due to the dispute over the bargaining unit description, the Board directed that ballots be segregated and counted separately based on the employer's three proposed units, and ordered the ballot box sealed pending further agreement or order.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent part-time employees at the responding party's nursing home.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.

Finding that at least 40% of the individuals in the proposed unit were members of the union, the Board directed a representation vote.

The intervenor raised objections regarding alleged unfair labour practices and requested that the ballot box be sealed, but the Board declined, noting previous rulings on similar objections.

The Board ordered the vote to proceed and the ballots to be counted.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Pleasant Meadow Manor Nursing Home.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held.

The intervenor raised objections regarding alleged unfair labour practices and requested that the ballot box be sealed, but the Board declined to seal the ballot box, noting that similar objections had been dismissed in other displacement applications.

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

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a consent order directing the disbursement of funds held in trust by the Director of Employment Standards, with $2,500 paid to the employee, $4,307.06 returned to the employer, and $680.70 retained as an administration fee.

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.

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.

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

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite 40% membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with segregated ballots for disputed positions including engineers and students.

The parties' dispute over the geographic scope of the bargaining unit was deferred to a post-vote hearing or resolution.

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.

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

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Board ordered the Director in trust to disburse the $7,488.00 held, with $3,000.00 to the employee, $3,656.00 to the employer, and $832.00 retained as an administration fee.

The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to arbitration and applied for a related employer declaration under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Board issued a consent order declaring the responding businesses to be a single employer bound by the collective agreement.

The Board also ordered the responding parties to pay $81,500 in damages for collective agreement violations and imposed reporting obligations.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging that her union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act by failing to properly represent her regarding her hours of work and a disciplinary suspension.

The applicant, a full-time Kitchen Helper, claimed she was entitled to 40 hours of work per week and that less senior employees were receiving more hours.

The union investigated the complaints, met with the employer, and concluded that the other employees were either in a different classification (apprentice) or working a different schedule without overtime pay.

The Board found that the union thoroughly investigated the complaints, reasonably concluded there was no breach of the collective agreement, and adequately explained its decision to the applicant.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the responding union breached section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The union requested that the Board dismiss the application without a hearing, arguing that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case.

The Board reviewed the application and concluded that, assuming all allegations were true and provable, the applicant had pled a prima facie case.

The union's request to dismiss the application was therefore declined.

The applicant requested a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision denying her claim for termination pay.

The applicant took time off for an unspecified illness, after which the employer advertised her position and issued a cheque marked 'Separation Pay'.

The employer argued it had not terminated her employment and was holding her position open.

The Board found that a reasonable person would have surmised they were dismissed, concluding the employer effectively terminated the employment without notice.

The employer was ordered to pay two weeks' pay in lieu of notice.

The Board previously upheld an Employment Standards Officer's finding that the responding party was an employee entitled to vacation and public holiday pay.

The applicant employer disputed the quantum of the Order to Pay but failed to file submissions by the Board's deadline.

Consequently, the Board confirmed the Order to Pay in the amount of $2,726.10 and directed the Director of Employment Standards to remit the funds to the employee.

The applicant, a probationary employee who was terminated after a workplace accident, filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

He alleged the union failed to properly represent him in his grievance, WSIB claim, and health and safety complaint.

The Board dismissed the application without a hearing, finding no prima facie case of arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith conduct.

The union had filed a grievance, represented the applicant at multiple stages, and reasonably decided not to proceed to arbitration given his probationary status and the employer's prior dissatisfaction with his performance.

The Board also noted the union had no duty to represent him in WSIB or Ministry of Labour matters.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer improperly laid off seven Toronto-based employees out of seniority order, arguing that less senior employees working in Sudbury (International territory) should have been laid off first.

The employer maintained that the northern employees were outside Local 50's jurisdiction and therefore not subject to bumping by Toronto members.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the collective agreement's seniority and layoff provisions must be read in conjunction with its jurisdictional clauses.

The Board concluded that Local 50's jurisdiction and the associated employment preferences do not extend into International territory, meaning Toronto members could not exercise seniority to bump northern employees.