G. T. Surdykowski

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

A. M. Minsky

J. Redshaw

G. T. Surdykowski

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 6, 1987

Intervener granted status in certification application based on membership evidence; employer bound by prior agreement on employee list.

The applicant trade union applied for certification for a unit of carpenters employed by the respondent.

The intervener trade union sought to participate, arguing it already represented the employees under existing collective agreements or, alternatively, had membership evidence for at least one affected employee.

The Board found the existing agreements did not cover carpenters but granted the intervener status based on membership evidence filed at the hearing.

The Board also held the respondent could not resile from a prior written agreement with the applicant regarding the list of employees in the bargaining unit, though the intervener remained free to challenge the list.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters' & Joiners of America, Local Union 27 v. Runnymede Development Corporation Limited, 1987 CanLII 3112

W Thornton

12 cases1985–1996

Douglas J. Wray

Doug Gilbert

5 cases1987–1995

A. M. Minsky

P. Grasso

OLRB0 cases1984–1993

G. T. Surdykowski

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 1, 1987

Board clarifies document production directions and denies reconsideration of its prior order.

The interveners sought clarification and reconsideration of a prior Board decision regarding document production and summonses.

The Board clarified its directions, varied one subparagraph on consent, and otherwise denied the request for reconsideration.

The Board affirmed that the documents in question were arguably relevant to the issues and must be produced, despite the potential burden of compliance.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 27 v. Mollenhauer Limited, 1987 CanLII 3107

Mr. Richmond

2 cases1987–2001

Mr. Caley

G. Charney

6 cases1982–1987

Douglas J. Wray

M. Eayrs

OLRB0 cases1981–1989

J. Redshaw

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 1987

Application for certification dismissed after union failed to timely object to a representation vote.

In an application for certification, a representation vote was held but no ballots were cast because the employees were not on the job site.

The applicant union failed to object or request a new vote until almost three months later, well past the deadline.

The Board held that the test for timeliness of objections is whether, with reasonable diligence, the factual basis would not have come to the objector's attention before the deadline.

Finding that the applicant failed to exercise reasonable diligence, the Board denied the request for a new vote and dismissed the application.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters' & Joiners of America, Local Union 27 v. Nimel Construction Limited, 1987 CanLII 3110

Terence J. Billo

7 cases1985–2008

Michael Mulroy

2 cases1987–2012

Ian S. Campbell

19 cases1985–2012

H. Kobryn

G. T. Surdykowski

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 1987

Representation vote ordered in certification application due to intimidation of employees circulating an opposing petition.

The union applied for certification for a construction industry bargaining unit.

The employer argued the unit should only include plumbers, not steamfitters, as it only employed plumbers.

The Board granted the standard craft unit which includes both.

Although the union filed sufficient membership evidence for automatic certification, two employees filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging they were intimidated by union supporters when trying to circulate a statement of desire opposing the union.

The Board found that the intimidation stopped the circulation of the statement of desire and the union failed to address the improper conduct.

Consequently, the Board exercised its discretion to order a representation vote.

One Board member dissented, arguing the union should be certified outright.

The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union 527 v. D. E. Witmer Plumbing and Heating Limited, 1987 CanLII 3113

R. Lotito

9 cases1985–1998

Richard J. Charney

In Private Practice60 cases1985–2025

Mike Mihallo vie

Jules Bloch

5 cases1987–1990

John Formusa

Bernard Fishbein

78 cases1982–2011

Allison Hudgins

I. M. Stamp

H. Kobryn

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 18, 1987

Union certified without representation vote after Board rejects late addition to employee list and upholds membership evidence.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of the respondent's employees.

The Board reconsidered and varied a portion of its previous decision regarding the intervener's bargaining rights.

On the merits of the certification, the Board refused to allow the respondent to add an employee to the list after multiple previous amendments, noting the information was always in the respondent's control.

The Board also found the applicant's documentary evidence of membership to be unambiguous and reliable.

As the applicant demonstrated membership support of over fifty-five percent, the Board issued certificates to the applicant without a representation vote.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 506 v. Menkes Developments Inc., 1987 CanLII 3106

W Thornton

12 cases1985–1996

Douglas J. Wray

Doug Gilbert

5 cases1987–1995

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

A. M. Minsky

P. Grasso

OLRB0 cases1984–1993

G. T. Surdykowski

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 8, 1987

The Board narrowed the scope of summonses for document production but ordered disclosure of arguably relevant records.

During proceedings before the Ontario Labour Relations Board, the applicant issued summonses to two individuals requiring them to produce various documents relating to collective agreements and bargaining history.

The interveners objected to the scope of the summonses, arguing they were overly broad, irrelevant, and constituted a fishing expedition.

The Board held that a party seeking production through a summons need only demonstrate that the documents are arguably relevant to the matters in issue.

Finding that the requested documents were arguably relevant to the interpretation of the collective agreements and the admissibility of extrinsic evidence, the Board ordered production but narrowed the scope of the summonses to ensure they were not overly broad.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 27 v. Mollenhauer Limited, 1987 CanLII 3082

Stanley Simpson

22 cases1981–2001

Ian S. Campbell

19 cases1985–2012

J. Redshaw

I. M. Stamp

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 26, 1987

Union's bargaining rights terminated after sole employee votes against representation.

The applicant applied to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights.

A representation vote was held where the applicant was the sole voter and voted against the union.

The union challenged the vote, arguing the applicant was not eligible to vote as he had not worked in the ICI sector prior to the vote, and that a single employee was not representative of the workforce.

The Board dismissed the union's objections, finding no evidence to doubt the applicant's eligibility and confirming that a single employee can constitute a bargaining unit for the purpose of terminating bargaining rights.

The Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees.

Richard Grandy v. The Ontario Pipe Trades Council of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 527, 1987 CanLII 3282

R. Lotito

9 cases1985–1998

Richard J. Charney

In Private Practice60 cases1985–2025

Mike Mihajlovie

Jules Bloch

5 cases1987–1990

John Formusa

Bernard Fishbein

78 cases1982–2011

Alison Hudgins

I. M. Stamp

H. Kobryn

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 22, 1987

Board denies adjournment in certification application and defines appropriate construction industry bargaining unit.

The applicant union sought certification for construction labourers employed by the respondent.

The respondent and intervener requested an adjournment, arguing the Board needed to interpret an existing collective agreement and address a related employer issue.

The Board denied the adjournment, finding it unnecessary to interpret the existing agreement to determine the appropriate bargaining unit, and noting the related employer issue was not properly before it.

The Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit and scheduled further hearings to resolve disputes over the list of employees.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 506 v. Menkes Developments Inc., 1987 CanLII 3292

Norman A. Keith

21 cases1983–2018

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 28, 1987

G. O. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1994

B. L. Armstrong

OLRB0 cases1980–1997

Three-week suspension for insubordination reduced to ten days due to employer's reliance on unrecorded past incidents.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board challenging a three-week suspension imposed on the grievor for insubordination and the use of abusive language towards management.

The employer relied on the culminating incident and several past incidents to justify the penalty.

The Board found that the employer improperly relied on past incidents that did not form part of the grievor's formal disciplinary record.

However, given the grievor's two prior written warnings and the severity of his insubordination, the Board exercised its discretion under section 44(9) of the Labour Relations Act to substitute a ten-day suspension for the original three-week penalty.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v. Nadrofsky Corporation, 1987 CanLII 3270

Walter Thornton

47 cases1986–2001

O. J. Montgomery

Aldo Bigioni

J. Wilson

OLRB0 cases1981–1987

J. Redshaw

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 21, 1987

Union applying for ICI certification need not include non-ICI employees from all geographic areas.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent construction labourers employed by the respondent in the ICI sector province-wide and in all other sectors in Board Area 5.

The respondent argued that because it employed construction labourers in Board Area 8, the union was required under section 144(1) of the Labour Relations Act to include those employees in its proposed bargaining unit.

The Board rejected this argument, holding that section 144(1) permits but does not require a union to apply for more than one geographic area.

The Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit and referred disputes over the inclusion of specific individuals to a Labour Relations Officer.

Labourers' International Union of North America v. Dagmar Construction Limited, 1987 CanLII 3263

L. Steinberg

45 cases1982–2001

Ian S. Campbell

19 cases1985–2012

J. Wilson

OLRB0 cases1981–1987

J. Redshaw

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 21, 1987

Union certified for construction bargaining unit as shop employees regularly performed on-site installation work.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent journeymen sheet metal workers and registered apprentices employed by the respondent.

The respondent argued that the application should be treated under the general provisions of the Labour Relations Act rather than the construction industry provisions, as it primarily operated a custom steel fabricating shop and only one employee performed on-site installation full-time.

The Board found that the respondent operated a business in the construction industry and that the shop employees regularly spent a significant portion of their time doing on-site construction work.

The Board concluded that the employees were commonly associated in their work with the on-site employee and were properly included in the construction bargaining unit.

As the applicant had the requisite membership support, the Board directed that certificates issue.

Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, Local 562 v. Ridsdale Steel Fabricators Inc., 1987 CanLII 3257

Stanley Simpson

22 cases1981–2001

Robert Salisbury

10 cases1986–2016

R. A. Werry

38 cases1980–1994

M. A. Church

9 cases1981–1990

Harvey Jardine

Fred Wilson

2 cases1987–1992

Dale Austin

Charles Horman

Bruce Chan

I. M. Stamp

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 2, 1987

D. Patterson

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

Work assignment complaint dismissed as the union sought only an academic declaration serving no labour relations purpose.

The complainants filed a work assignment complaint under section 91 of the Labour Relations Act regarding the installation of metal stamping presses.

At the hearing, the complainants amended their request, seeking only a declaration for educational purposes rather than an assignment of the work.

The Board exercised its discretion under subsection 91(1) not to inquire into the complaint, finding that a purely academic declaration would serve no labour relations purpose.

The complaint was dismissed.

Ontario Pipe Trades Council v. COSMA, 1987 CanLII 3269

Robert R. Reid

L. A. MacLean

20 cases1980–1993

D. I. Wakely

11 cases1980–1989

R. Wilson

OLRB0 cases1985–1990

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 31, 1987

G. O. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1994

Board directed intervener to provide further particulars of misconduct allegations in certification application.

In an application for certification, the intervener union filed allegations of misconduct.

The respondent employer brought a preliminary motion demanding further particulars of the allegations.

The Board reviewed the legal and labour relations considerations for requiring particulars, noting the need for natural justice and avoiding prejudicial delay.

The Board directed the intervener to provide specific particulars regarding dates, times, places, and persons involved in the alleged meetings and incidents, and adjourned the hearing on the merits.

Pebra Peterborough Employees Association v. Pebra Peter-borough Inc., 1987 CanLII 3042

R. Last

3 cases1987–1991

Mark B. Coulston

B. Fishbein

68 cases1980–1996

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 24, 1987

F. W. Murray

OLRB0 cases1980–1988

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Union certification application converted from construction to general provisions after work deemed maintenance.

The applicant trade union originally applied for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board previously determined that the work performed was maintenance work, not construction work.

The applicant requested the application be processed under the general provisions of the Act.

The respondent and objecting employees opposed this request, citing procedural fairness.

The Board found no unfairness or prejudice and, following its established practice, ruled that the application would be treated as having been made under the general provisions.

International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades, Local 1590 v. Jette Pedersen, 1987 CanLII 3032

S. C. Bernardo

42 cases1980–2001

S. Bernardo

Richard Westlake

Phillip Wiseman

N. W. Meikie

J. P. Borden

J. A. Jackson

I. Starasts

2 cases1986–1987

H. A. Beresford

14 cases1980–1989

G. Grossman

32 cases1980–1987

Chris Doona

C. Burrows

2 cases1987–1988

A. J. Ahee

18 cases1986–2001

L M. Stamp

OLRB0 cases1985–1988

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 18, 1987

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Applications for certification dismissed as the union already held bargaining rights for the employees.

The applicant trade union filed four applications for certification in the construction industry.

The Board found that the applicant already held bargaining rights for all the employees in the requested bargaining units under existing provincial agreements.

Because there were no unrepresented employees in any of the bargaining units on the date of application, and the applications were not made during the open periods of the collective agreements, the Board dismissed all four applications.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of The Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of The United States and Canada v. Brown Boveri Howden Inc., 1987 CanLII 3051

R. Last

3 cases1987–1991

Mark B. Coulston

A. M. Minsky

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 4, 1987

F. W. Murray

OLRB0 cases1980–1988

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Painting existing structures for protection is maintenance work, not construction work under the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant trade union applied for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent employer argued it was not an employer in the construction industry, as its painting work at petrochemical complexes was maintenance, not construction.

The Board found that the painting of existing structures for the primary purpose of sustaining and protecting operating systems constitutes maintenance work.

Consequently, the application was not properly made under the construction industry provisions.

The Board also struck out the respondent's allegations of union impropriety due to lack of particulars and rejected one membership card for failing to show a monetary payment.

International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades, Local 1590 v. Jette Pedersen, 1987 CanLII 3034

Morton Adelson

Suspended Administratively2 cases1987–2012

J. Redshaw

G. T. Surdykowski

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 23, 1987

Application to terminate union bargaining rights dismissed as union had not failed to bargain.

The employer applied under section 59 of the Labour Relations Act for a declaration that the respondent union no longer represented the bargaining unit employees, arguing that 70% of the employees no longer wished to be represented by the union.

The union opposed the application, noting that it had not failed to bargain and had recently applied for conciliation.

The Board found that section 59 is designed to protect against a union that fails to exercise its bargaining rights, not to monitor union support.

The Board also declined to use its reconsideration powers under section 106(1) to terminate bargaining rights based on events occurring after certification, emphasizing the need for finality and stability in labour relations.

The application was dismissed.

The London Soap Company Limited v. London and District Service Workers' Union, Local 220, 1987 CanLII 3008

Murray Gold

16 cases1986–2013

Mary Ellen Cummings

6 cases1986–1989

W. H. Wightman

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 30, 1987

Application for certification dismissed for insufficient membership support; Board abandons 'representative period' test for construction industry.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of painters and drywall tapers employed by the respondent.

The parties disputed the employment status of two individuals, whom the respondent claimed were independent contractors, and the inclusion of three others based on the work they performed.

The Board applied the fourfold and organizational tests to find the two individuals were employees.

The Board also found the other three individuals were properly included in the bargaining unit as they spent a majority of their time doing bargaining unit work on the application date.

The Board announced it would no longer use a 'representative period' to determine bargaining unit inclusion in the construction industry, restricting the inquiry to the application date.

As the union had less than forty-five percent membership support in the resulting unit, the application was dismissed.

International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades - Local Union 1891 v. Gilvesy Enterprises Inc., 1987 CanLII 3007

R. M. Sloan

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

J. Sarra

OLRB0 cases1986–1989

G. T. Surdykowski