Harry Freedman

Application for review of Order to Pay terminated following settlement agreement.

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

The employer and the affected employee reached a settlement agreement.

The Board ordered the funds held in trust to be disbursed according to the agreement and terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

3461505 Canada Inc. o/a Biltmore Furniture v. Leesa Shearman, 2001 CanLII 13800

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Application terminated after applicants failed to file submissions as directed by the Board.

The Board previously granted an application in Board File No. 3611-00-R and directed the applicants to advise whether there was any reason to consider the application in Board File No. 0410-01-R, failing which it would be deemed terminated.

As the applicants did not file any submissions, the application in Board File No. 0410-01-R was terminated.

Mihalis v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 285, 2001 CanLII 10797

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Grievance referral withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

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

The Board granted the request and the referral was withdrawn.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. 1333975 Ontario Inc. operating as Niveau Construction, 2001 CanLII 18710

Harry Freedman

Board extends time for responding party to file response before granting default judgment on grievance referral.

The applicant referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking unpaid remittances and liquidated damages.

The applicant filed the referral with the Board before delivering it to the responding party, contrary to Rule 155 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.

The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend/Participate (Form A-87) and did not attend a settlement meeting.

The applicant requested default judgment.

The Board declined to grant default judgment immediately due to the applicant's procedural irregularity and the inclusion of damages that arose after the referral was filed.

However, noting the responding party's failure to respond, the Board cancelled the scheduled hearing and extended the time for the responding party to file a Form A-87, warning that failure to do so would result in the matter being decided on the applicant's materials without a hearing.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 894 v. Stensca/Procon Ltd., 2001 CanLII 13819

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Grievance referral adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.

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

On agreement of the parties, the Board adjourned the application sine die, noting it would be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made within one year.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. The Conservatory Group et al., 2001 CanLII 10763

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 21, 2001

Grievance referral dismissed due to bankruptcy stay; benefit contributions are not wages recoverable from directors.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board seeking unpaid benefit contributions and late payment damages from the responding party employer.

The employer had made an assignment in bankruptcy, triggering a stay of proceedings under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

The union requested an ex parte order, arguing the stay did not apply because it sought to establish liability to pursue the employer's directors under the Business Corporations Act.

The Board dismissed the referral, finding the stay applied and that the amounts claimed (benefit fund contributions and damages) did not constitute 'wages' recoverable from directors under the OBCA.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industries of the United States and Canada, Local 46 v. Bennett & Wright Group Inc., 2001 CanLII 5940

Michael Klug

26 cases1992–2024

Kevin Robinson

6 cases2000–2018

John Moszynski

71 cases1986–2017

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 19, 2001

Motion to strike allegations of employer support granted due to untimeliness and failure to provide particulars.

During a hearing for certification and an unfair labour practice application, the responding employer and the applicant union brought a motion to strike out certain allegations made by the intervenor union.

The intervenor had alleged employer support for the applicant union but failed to provide detailed particulars as directed by previous Board decisions.

The Board found the allegations to be untimely and lacking in the required particulars.

The Board also held that the reverse onus provision under section 96(5) of the Labour Relations Act did not apply to allegations of employer support.

The motion was granted, and the allegations relating to employer support were struck out.

Labourers’ International Union of North America v. 870528 Ontario Ltd., o/a Lido Construction Co., 2001 CanLII 17372

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 11, 2001

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Board grants applicant's request for an extension of time to seek a production order.

The applicant requested an extension of time to request a production order in a challenge to a proposed project agreement, citing the need to secure more information about wages, hours of work, and overtime provisions in recently negotiated provincial agreements.

The Board granted the extension to June 12, 2001, but maintained the other dates for filing submissions.

The Board also noted that only the Sarnia Construction Association as agent for Shell Canada Products had advised of its desire to participate, so service on other responding parties was not necessary.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 530 v. Sarnia Construction Association, 2001 CanLII 4029

Harry Freedman

Reconsideration dismissed; the Board lacks statutory authority to extend the strict deadline for filing appeals.

The appellant applied for reconsideration of a decision dismissing its appeal of an inspector's order under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The original appeal was dismissed for being filed one day late.

The appellant argued the delay was caused by a courier's failure to deliver the materials on time.

The Board dismissed the application for reconsideration, confirming that it lacks the statutory authority to extend the time for filing an appeal under the Act, even though the delay was not the appellant's fault.

Cambridge Towel Corporation v. Richard Den Bok, 2001 CanLII 18751

Harry Freedman

Representation vote directed for municipal employees following agreement on bargaining unit.

The applicant municipality applied under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

Having regard to the parties' agreement on the appropriate bargaining unit, the Ontario Labour Relations Board directed a representation vote to determine whether the employees wish to be represented by CUPE Local 3405 or IWA Canada Local 2693.

The Corporation of the Municipality of Greenstone v. CUPE Local 3045 – Town of Geraldton, 2001 CanLII 7981

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Board issued a revised certificate to correct an error in the bargaining unit description.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision correcting a previously issued certificate that incorrectly described the bargaining unit for journeymen electricians and apprentices employed by Lockhart Electric (Sarnia) Ltd. A revised certificate was issued and the parties were directed to return the earlier certificate for cancellation.

Construction Workers Local 53, CLAC v. Lockhart Electric (Sarnia) Ltd., 2001 CanLII 20077

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Board issued a revised certificate to correct an error in the bargaining unit description.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision to correct a previously issued certificate that incorrectly described the bargaining unit for journeymen electricians and apprentices employed by Ogilvie Electric Inc. A revised certificate was issued, and the parties were directed to return the earlier certificate for cancellation.

Construction Workers Local 53 v. Ogilvie Electric Inc., 2001 CanLII 14466

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 5, 2001

Application for review of Order to Pay withdrawn; Board lacks jurisdiction over improperly collected funds.

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

After filing the application and paying the requisite amount in trust, the applicant advised the Board it wished to withdraw the appeal but sought assistance recovering funds removed from its bank account via a third party demand by a collection agency.

The Board noted it lacked jurisdiction to direct the Ministry of Labour to return improperly collected funds.

The application was withdrawn at the applicant's request.

Weldon Park Academy v. Lehman, 2001 CanLII 5682

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 5, 2001

Extension of time granted for late application to review Order to Pay due to lack of prejudice.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act one week after the 45-day deadline.

The applicant explained that it had misread the Employment Standards Officer's letter regarding the deadline.

The Board noted the short delay, the applicant's prompt response and demonstrated intent to file on time, and the lack of prejudice to the responding parties.

Exercising its discretion under section 68(4) of the Act, the Board granted an extension of time to validate the late filing.

Northern Leisure Manufacturing v. Abdul Aziz Samad, 2001 CanLII 20107

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 5, 2001

Time to file application for review extended where messenger arrived at 5:00 p.m. on deadline day.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Order to Pay one day after the 45-day statutory deadline.

The applicant's counsel submitted that a messenger attempted to file the application on the final day but arrived at the Board's offices at 5:00 p.m. and found the elevators locked.

The messenger returned the next morning and filed the materials.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 68(4) of the Employment Standards Act to extend the time for making the application, noting the short delay, the applicant's clear intention to file on time, and the lack of prejudice to the responding parties.

Nedco, a Division of Westburne Industrial Enterprises (W.I.E.L.) Ltd. v. Fred Leblond, 2001 CanLII 7455

Harry Freedman

Application for review of Order to Pay terminated following Minutes of Settlement between employer and employee.

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

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing to disburse the funds held in trust by the Director.

The Board ordered the funds disbursed in accordance with the settlement and terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

Century Building Maintenance v. Robert Martin, 2001 CanLII 3761

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Certification application dismissed and ballots ordered destroyed after union acknowledged less than 40% membership support.

The applicant union applied for certification but subsequently acknowledged that less than 40% of the individuals in its proposed bargaining unit appeared to be its members.

The Board dismissed the application pursuant to section 8.1(5)7 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The intervenor requested that the ballots cast in the representation vote be counted due to interest in the outcome.

The Board denied the request, noting that the Act explicitly requires the ballots to be destroyed without being counted when an application is dismissed under this section.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. K-Line Maintenance & Construction Ltd., 2001 CanLII 14320

Harry Freedman

Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for untimeliness and insufficient funds.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay.

The application was filed more than 45 days after the date of the Order, making it untimely.

Furthermore, the applicant's cheque to pay the required amount in trust was returned for insufficient funds.

The applicant failed to provide submissions to extend the time for making the application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application for review as it was not properly made.

George Neufeld v. Peter Hiebert et al., 2001 CanLII 7023

Harry Freedman