G. McMenemy

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 3, 2000

D. L. Gee

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant, Christian Labour Association of Canada, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Elta Gas Services Ltd. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Elta Gas Services Ltd., 2000 CanLII 10211

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 2, 2000

Related employer declaration granted after responding parties failed to file a response to the application.

The applicant union filed an application under section 69 and subsection 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking a declaration that the responding parties are a single employer and bound by a collective agreement.

The responding parties failed to file a response and were deemed to have accepted all facts stated in the application pursuant to Rule 41 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.

The Board found that the uncontested facts established a prima facie case for the relief sought.

The Board declared the responding parties to be a single employer and bound to the applicable collective agreement.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 786 v. Calorific Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 12043

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

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

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 1, 2000

D. L. Gee

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

Representation vote directed in construction industry certification application after employer failed to respond.

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

The responding party failed to file a response.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible individuals in the voting constituency.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. BFC Buildings, 2000 CanLII 3659

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

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

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

David A. McKee

Board directs representation vote in construction industry certification application despite dispute over nature of work.

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

The responding party raised an issue regarding whether the work performed was in the construction industry, but the Board determined this would not delay the representation vote.

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

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 837 v. Bramkal Contractors Inc., 2000 CanLII 7188

John M. Lewis

OLRB0 cases1999–2000

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Board amended its previous decision to correct the name of the applicant union.

The Board issued a brief decision to amend its previous decision dated April 12, 2000.

The amendment corrected the name of the applicant to 'Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183'.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Elmford Construction Company Limited, 2000 CanLII 8034

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

David A. McKee

Board issues consent declarations for related employer and sale of business following parties' settlement.

The applicant union brought an application under subsection 1(4) and section 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing that the responding parties were bound by the collective agreement due to a sale of business and constituted a single employer for labour relations purposes.

The Board issued the requested declarations and consent orders in accordance with the settlement.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 463 v. Doef’s Ironworks Ltd., 2000 CanLII 13320

John M. Lewis

OLRB0 cases1999–2000

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Board amends previous decision to correct the applicant's name.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued an amendment to its previous decision dated April 12, 2000, to correct the name of the applicant to 'Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183'.

Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183 v. Dirpam/Edilcan, 2000 CanLII 8319

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

David A. McKee

Representation vote directed in construction industry certification application.

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

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada, Local 1 v. Bramkal Contractors Inc., 2000 CanLII 6097

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 20, 2000

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Union's applications for certification and unfair labour practice withdrawn with a one-year bar imposed.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its applications for certification and unfair labour practice.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications and imposed a one-year bar on any new application for certification by the applicant or its affiliated bargaining agents for the same bargaining unit.

The Board also directed the destruction of ballots cast in the representation vote.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527 v. Eric’s Concrete & Masonry Services Ltd., 2000 CanLII 11753

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy