G. McMenemy

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Union's objections to employer's section 8.1 notice dismissed; matter referred for hearing with related application.

The applicant union challenged the timeliness and validity of a section 8.1 notice filed by the responding employer in a certification application.

The Board found the notice was timely, as the calculation of the two-day period excluded Good Friday and Easter Monday pursuant to the Interpretation Act.

The Board also found the notice valid as it contained the required estimates and bargaining unit descriptions.

The Board directed that the outstanding issues be listed for hearing together with a related unfair labour practice application.

Allied Construction Employees, Local 1030 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Erro-Wood Construction, 2001 CanLII 9638

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

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

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

The intervenor filed a statement of desire seeking to have the application dismissed based on the vote results.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Act regarding the effect on any subsequent application filed within one year.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Yukon Construction Inc., 2001 CanLII 5394

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Board declined to order production of documents pending written submissions from responding parties.

The applicant union sought an order requiring the production of documents and particulars from the responding parties in advance of the hearing.

The applicant submitted that it had requested information from the responding parties but had not received a response.

Given the scope and nature of the documents sought, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to make an order until the responding parties had an opportunity to make submissions.

The Board directed the parties to file written submissions regarding the production request and remained seized of the matter.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Mannesman Dematic Rapistan Limited, 2001 CanLII 19813

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure more than 50% of representation vote ballots.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than 50% of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

The intervenor requested the application be dismissed based on the vote results.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act regarding the effect on any subsequent application filed within one year.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. David Hawkins Line Services Inc., 2001 CanLII 10317

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure more than 50% of representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where not more than 50% of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The Board noted that the applicant had not established it was a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, but declined to determine the issue as the application was dismissed in any event.

The Board directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Act regarding subsequent applications.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Eptcon Ltd., 2001 CanLII 17924

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

Christopher J. Albertyn

Board orders production of additional documents dating back three years prior to the application.

The applicant union requested an order for the production of additional documents in a construction grievance and related employer application.

The Board directed the responding parties to produce the requested documents dating back to March 11, 1996.

For documents prior to that date, the applicant's counsel was permitted to inspect them at the responding parties' offices and obtain copies at the applicant's expense.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Lake Ontario District Council v. Lardale Construction, 2001 CanLII 10644

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant, Teamsters Local Union No. 879, requested to withdraw its application against Paper Fibres Inc. and Alfa Paper Products Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

Teamsters Local Union No. 879 v. Paper Fibres Inc. and Alfa Paper Products Inc., 2001 CanLII 18953

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application against the responding employers.

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

Teamsters Local Union No. 879 v. Paper Fibres Inc. and Alfa Paper Products Inc., 2001 CanLII 14145

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Grievance referral withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant requested to withdraw its referral of a grievance to the Board.

The Board granted the request and the referral was withdrawn.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 586 v. Univex (Canada) Ltd., 2001 CanLII 12817

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Request to delay representation vote and reconsider vote direction dismissed; vote to proceed as scheduled.

In an application for certification, the intervenor trade union sought to delay the representation vote, alleging failure of service and claiming to represent some employees in the proposed bargaining unit.

The responding party employer also requested reconsideration of the Board's decision directing the vote and proposed a different bargaining unit description.

The Board dismissed the request for reconsideration and declined to delay the vote, noting that the voting constituency specifically excluded persons already represented by another trade union.

The Board held that issues regarding the appropriate bargaining unit could be determined after the vote.

Construction Workers Local 53 v. Seal-On Paving Ltd., 2001 CanLII 12548

Harry Freedman

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

Board amends jurisdictional dispute decision to clarify tending work assignment.

The responding unions requested clarification of the Board's March 21, 2001 decision regarding a jurisdictional dispute over masonry restoration work.

They sought an amendment to reflect that the work assigned to BACU Local 5 was to be tended by members of Labourers' Local 1059.

As the applicant made no submissions in response and no other parties objected, the Board granted the request and amended its previous decision accordingly.

Clifford Restoration Limited v. Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, 2001 CanLII 3030

Elizabeth Mitchell

31 cases1988–2001

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

D. L. Gee

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

Termination application dismissed as no employees were performing bargaining unit work on the application date.

The applicants sought to terminate the bargaining rights of the International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades in the ICI sector.

At a consultation, the Board determined that the individuals on the voters list were performing work under a Maintenance Agreement on the application date, not under the Painters Provincial ICI Collective Agreement.

As no one was eligible to vote, the termination application was dismissed.

The related grievance and unfair labour practice complaints were adjourned sine die on consent.

Dorion v. International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades, 2001 CanLII 11405

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Representation vote directed in construction industry certification application despite dispute over bargaining unit description.

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

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and the proposed bargaining unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Act.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support (not less than forty per cent) in its proposed bargaining unit to warrant a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the employees in the voting constituency.

Construction Workers Local 53 v. Seal-On Paving Ltd., 2001 CanLII 7841

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

Caroline Rowan

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Related employer declaration issued with retrospective effect after confirmation that Gaming Control Act registration was not required.

The Union applied for a related employer declaration under s. 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board previously found the responding parties were carrying on associated or related activities but deferred making the declaration until the Union confirmed it did not require registration under the Gaming Control Act, 1992.

The Union provided confirmation from the Alcohol and Gaming Commission that registration was not required.

The Employer requested a postponement pending a reconsideration by the Commission.

The Board declined to postpone, issued the related employer declaration, and found no compelling reasons to limit its retrospective effect, making it effective from April 20, 1999, when the related activities commenced.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 2486 v. MacIsaac Mining and Tunnelling Company, 2001 CanLII 14958

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Default judgment entered against employer for failing to remit benefit contributions and vacation pay.

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

The responding party employer failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate 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 declared that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement and had violated it by failing to remit proper benefit contributions and vacation pay.

A hearing was scheduled to assess damages.

The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, district Council 46 (Local Union 1891) v. Industry Drywall Systems Ltd., 2001 CanLII 2630

Robert Leone

7 cases1995–2001

Richard J. Drmaj

2 cases1999–2001

Mike McCreary

20 cases1991–2019

Alan Minsky

3 cases1998–2001

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2001

D. L. Gee

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

Adjournment of grievance referral denied as the matter involved collective agreement interpretation, not work assignment.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration alleging the employer discriminated against a union steward by not assigning him overtime scaffolding work.

The employer and an intervenor union requested an adjournment pending the outcome of a separate jurisdictional dispute application regarding scaffolding work.

The Board denied the adjournment request, finding that the grievance involved purely a question of collective agreement interpretation and application, as the employer had already assigned the work to members of the applicant union.

The Board ruled that determining the grievance would not require assessing whether the work was correctly assigned.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1089 v. Doug Chalmers Construction Limited, 2001 CanLII 18255

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 24, 2001

Consent order issued enforcing minutes of settlement for collective agreement violations and unpaid benefit contributions.

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 resolving all matters arising out of the grievance.

The Board issued a consent order declaring the responding party bound by the applicable collective agreements and ordering the payment of $1,000 in damages and the remittance of outstanding benefit trust fund contributions.

Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 30 v. French Brothers Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd., 2001 CanLII 11983

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 24, 2001

Union applications withdrawn and dismissed on agreement of the parties.

The applicant union brought applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On agreement of the parties, the unfair labour practice application was withdrawn and the certification application was dismissed pursuant to section 8.1(5) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 27 v. Quality Rugs of Canada Limited, 2001 CanLII 6217

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy