Gail Misra

Employment standards application withdrawn following settlement; trust monies released to applicant.

The applicant brought an application regarding an employment standards matter.

The parties reached Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the Director of Employment Standards to release all monies held in trust, less the administrative fee, to the applicant.

The application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The Corporation of the City of Mississauga v. Irene Petrunti, 2000 CanLII 12652

Gail Misra

Board approves settlement regarding Employment Standards Act Order to Pay for one employee.

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

The applicant and one of the responding employees, Carlos Altedill, resolved their dispute via Minutes of Settlement.

The Board ordered the Director of Employment Standards to release $900 plus accrued interest to Mr. Altedill from the funds held in trust.

The application regarding the other employee, Carlos Medeiros, remains unresolved and will proceed to a hearing.

Matrix Automotive Ltd. v. Altedill, 2000 CanLII 13167

Board declines to order pre-hearing document production in a section 133 construction industry grievance.

The applicant union requested an order for pre-hearing production of itemized documents in a section 133 grievance under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to make the order, noting there is no legislated requirement for an employer to provide pre-hearing production in such grievances.

The Board advised that the union could issue a summons to the responding party for the required documents at the hearing.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1059 v. Eton Construction (Canada) Inc., 2000 CanLII 13064

Gail Misra

Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for failure to pay amount into trust.

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

However, the applicant failed to pay the amount of the Order into trust with the Director of Employment Standards within the required 45-day period.

As section 68(7) of the Act mandates payment into trust as a precondition for review, and the Board has no discretion to waive this requirement, the application was dismissed.

Vincenza Dellasiepe o/a Express Haulage v. David Dunphy and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 12064

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Gail Misra

Request for pre-hearing document production in a section 133 grievance denied.

The applicant union requested an order for pre-hearing production of itemized documents in a section 133 grievance.

The Board declined to make the order, noting there is no legislated requirement for pre-hearing production in such grievances and the union could issue a summons for the documents needed at the hearing.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Local 5 v. Hyde Park Masonry Limited, 2000 CanLII 13066

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 1, 2000

Union's request for reconsideration dismissed as untimely and for failing to establish valid grounds.

The applicant union requested reconsideration of a Board decision regarding a bad faith bargaining complaint.

The Board dismissed the request, finding it was filed beyond the 20-day time limit under Rule 96 without explanation.

The Board further noted that even if timely, the request would be dismissed because it merely reargued the case and disputed findings of fact based on documents the parties themselves had put before the Board, failing to meet the stringent grounds required for reconsideration.

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1731 v. McIntosh Limousine Service Ltd., 2000 CanLII 11818

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 1, 2000

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board following settlement.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application following a settlement reached between the parties.

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

Hotel Employees Restaurant Employees Union, Local 75 v. Fran Restaurant Ontario Ltd. 1196197, 2000 CanLII 13361

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 26, 2000

Applications deemed abandoned after applicants failed to respond to Board directions.

The applicants failed to respond to a previous Board direction requiring them to indicate whether they wished to continue with the litigation.

After attempting to contact counsel for Trentfab Inc. without success, the Adjudicator deemed the applications abandoned.

The Director of Employment Standards was directed to release the monies held in trust, along with accrued interest, to the employee responding party.

Stephen Allen v. Trenton Machine Tool Inc., 2000 CanLII 11762

Simone Najgaldberg

Phil Harris Sr.

Michael Gottheil

24 cases1986–2003

Jay Rider

8 cases1999–2001

James Barry

Daniel Condon

7 cases2000–2023

Chris Bosch

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 24, 2000

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicants sought to withdraw their application against IBEW Local 586 and MegaTech Electrical.

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

Claude Laviolette v. IBEW Local 586, 2000 CanLII 9490

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 19, 2000

Motion to suspend inspector's order pending appeal dismissed as union failed to show compelling grounds.

The applicant union sought to suspend an inspector's order pending an appeal under section 61(7) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

A worker had refused work citing the risk of physical assault from vehicle operators.

The inspector found that the complaint did not fall within the criteria for a work refusal under section 43(3) of the Act, but treated the concerns as a health and safety complaint and issued orders requiring corrective action.

The Board dismissed the suspension request, finding no compelling grounds to suspend the order, as the order did not limit the workers' right to refuse unsafe work and the employer was already complying with the corrective orders.

Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union v. Ministry of Transportation and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 12654

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 17, 2000

Employment standards application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant, Rashid Ahmed, sought to withdraw his employment standards application against Fat Albert's and the Ministry of Labour.

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

Rashid Ahmed v. Fat Albert’s and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 9528

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 14, 2000

Default judgment granted against employer for violating collective agreement by failing to use union members.

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

The responding parties failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend.

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

The Board found that the responding parties were bound by the collective agreement and violated it by failing to utilize union members for work at a Barrie condominium project.

The Board ordered the responding parties to pay $55,323.84 in damages and $214.00 for the applicant's filing fees.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Marilyn and/or Gale Knott c.o.b. as MMK Enterprises Steel Placing and/or Peterborough Reinforcing and G.E.K. Contracting Limited, 2000 CanLII 10507

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 14, 2000

Adjournment of director's appeal granted in advance to spare employee respondents unnecessary travel.

The applicant, a corporate director, requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing for an appeal under the Employment Standards Act.

Although the Ministry of Labour consented, the applicant failed to obtain consent from the numerous employee responding parties.

To spare the employees the inconvenience of traveling to Toronto only to have the adjournment granted, the Board granted the request in advance but warned the applicant that no further adjournments would be granted absent exceptional circumstances.

Boswell v. Woods et al, 2000 CanLII 13429

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Gail Misra

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 14, 2000

Consent order issued for $6,500 in damages for collective agreement violations following minutes of settlement.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of 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 party bound to the Provincial Collective Agreement and finding violations of Articles 4 and 5.

The responding party was ordered to pay $6,500 in damages as full and final settlement.

Lake Ontario District Council of Carpenters v. Source Four Construction Ltd., 2000 CanLII 13143

J. A. Ronson

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

H. Peacock

OLRB0 cases1987–2001

Gail Misra

Representation vote directed in certification application after employer failed to file a response.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party employer failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with voters asked to choose between the applicant and the incumbent union, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 3054.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada v. Ziegler Lumber Limited, 2000 CanLII 6197

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Gail Misra

Employer ordered to pay $5,412.28 in unpaid benefit contributions following failure to respond to grievance referral.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding employer failed to remit benefit trust fund contributions.

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

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 employer violated the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $5,412.28 in outstanding contributions, late charges, and penalties, plus $214.00 in filing fees.

Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 30 v. A.S.M. Sheet Metal Contractors Inc., 2000 CanLII 4797

Gail Misra

Time for filing request for review extended where delay was caused by Ministry forwarding application.

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

The application was received by the Board after the 45-day statutory deadline.

However, the Board found that the applicant had sent the application and the requisite payment in trust to the Ministry of Labour well within the time limit, and the delay was caused by the Ministry forwarding it to the Board.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 68(4) of the Act to extend the time for filing the application.

Excel Tech Ltd. v. Wayne Pyle and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 12715

Gail Misra

Appeal will be deemed terminated for abandonment unless applicant provides reasons to continue within 10 days.

The applicant filed an appeal but failed to make submissions as directed by the Board.

The Board directed the applicant to advise within 10 days why the application should continue to be processed, failing which the application will be deemed terminated for abandonment.

John Norton v. Freightliner of Canada and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 11813

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Gail Misra

Board directs representation vote in construction industry union certification application.

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

The responding party objected to the inclusion of Board Area 4 in the bargaining unit description, which the Board accepted.

Finding that the union appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support, the Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be held.

International Union of Painters and Allied Trades v. Blastco Corporation, 2000 CanLII 8962

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Gail Misra