Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 2000

Appeal of health and safety inspector's order dismissed as untimely under strict 30-day statutory limit.

The appellant filed an appeal of an inspector's order under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The order was made on August 22, 2000, but the appeal was not mailed until September 25, 2000, and received on September 27, 2000.

The Board dismissed the appeal as it was filed beyond the strict 30-day statutory time limit set out in section 61(1) of the Act, which the Board has no jurisdiction to extend.

Brian Maloney v. Ministry of Natural Resources, 2000 CanLII 7008

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 2000

Extension of time to respond to suspension application granted on condition of non-enforcement.

The appellant applied for a suspension of an inspector's order requiring the establishment of a joint health and safety committee.

The Ministry of Labour requested an extension of time to file a response to the suspension application because key officials were unavailable.

The Board granted the extension on the condition that the Ministry and the inspector take no action to enforce the order during the extension period.

Falconbridge Limited v. Sudbury Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers’ Union, Local 598/C.A.W., 2000 CanLII 4870

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 29, 2000

Application for review of order to pay conditionally dismissed unless employer pays outstanding administration costs.

The applicant employer applied for a review of an Employment Standards Officer's order to pay.

The applicant remitted a partial payment to the Director in trust, deducting statutory deductions but failing to pay the statutory administration costs of $335.69.

The Board held that an application for review is not properly made unless the full required amount is paid to the Director in trust.

The Board ordered the applicant to pay the outstanding administration costs and request an extension of time to apply for review within 10 days, failing which the application would be dismissed.

976395 Ontario Inc. o/a Moonfleet v. Burry, 2000 CanLII 6355

Harry Freedman

Applicant given 10 days to request an extension of time for a late review application.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay approximately three and a half years after the order was issued.

The applicant paid the required amount but did not request an extension of time or provide reasons for the delay.

The Board directed the applicant to file a formal request for an extension of time, along with supporting facts, within 10 days, failing which the application would be dismissed.

Harry Margel v. Shirley Hayley, 2000 CanLII 5453

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Grievance referrals adjourned sine die pending determination of related employer application.

The applicant filed an application for declaratory relief under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, along with two grievance referrals under section 133.

The applicant requested that the grievance referrals be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the related employer application.

The Board granted the request, adjourning the grievance referrals sine die and extending the time for the responding parties to file their responses to the grievances until after the related employer application is determined.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675 v. Lopes Drywall and Acoustics Inc., 2000 CanLII 10543

Harry Freedman

Applications for review of Orders to Pay terminated following written Minutes of Settlement.

The applicants sought review of two Orders to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The parties entered into written Minutes of Settlement with the assistance of a Labour Relations Officer.

The applicants paid the affected employees and the Ministry of Labour agreed to return the letters of credit.

The Board terminated the applications in accordance with subsection 69.1(5) of the Act.

Turgeon v. Angelillo, 2000 CanLII 3910

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Grievance referrals adjourned pending related application; pre-hearing production order for particulars denied.

The applicants requested that two grievance referrals be held in abeyance pending the outcome of a related application for declaratory relief under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board granted the adjournment sine die.

The applicants also sought a pre-hearing production order for documents and particulars.

The Board declined to order full production or particulars prior to the hearing, noting that sections 1(5) and 69(13) require responding parties to adduce relevant facts at the hearing, not to create documents or answer questions beforehand.

The Board directed the responding parties to advise the applicants which documents they were prepared to produce and left any remaining production disputes to the panel assigned to hear the application.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada v. Elcana Masonry Inc., 2000 CanLII 8902

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Representation vote directed in construction industry certification application; section 8.1 notice rejected.

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

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support and defined the appropriate bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The responding party's attempt to give notice under section 8.1 of the Act was rejected, as that section does not apply to construction industry certification applications.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527 v. Vanson Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 6285

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Grievance referral adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.

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

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

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. Rapistan Systems, 2000 CanLII 6201

Harry Freedman

Application for review of Order to Pay terminated following parties' Minutes of Settlement.

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 the disbursement of 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.

1286839 Ontario Limited v. Caira, 2000 CanLII 4014

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

Board issues consent order declaring employer bound to collective agreement and directing payment of damages.

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

The parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement settling the matter.

The Board issued a consent order declaring the applicant bound to the collective agreement and directing the payment of $10,000 in damages for violations of the agreement, subject to a payment schedule and conditions.

Walter B. Enterprises Inc. v. Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association Local 30, 2000 CanLII 10148

Harry Freedman

Application for review of employment standards officer's refusal dismissed for late filing.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order.

The application was filed beyond the 45-day statutory time limit.

The Board notified the applicant of the untimeliness and provided an opportunity to seek an extension of time.

The applicant failed to respond.

The Board declined to exercise its discretion to extend the time and dismissed the application.

Jeremy Hynes v. Eddie Shack Donuts, 2000 CanLII 3368

Harry Freedman

Application for review of Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue order dismissed as untimely.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The application was filed more than 45 days after the date of the letter advising of the refusal.

The Board notified the applicant of the untimeliness and provided an opportunity to request an extension of time.

The applicant did not respond.

The Board dismissed the application as untimely, finding no basis to exercise its discretion to extend the time.

Sofwat Sadek v. Clifford IDA Pharmacy, 2000 CanLII 9431

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Union's motion to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint by probationary employee for lack of prima facie case denied.

The applicant, a probationary employee, alleged that the responding union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act by refusing to represent him regarding his dismissal.

The union brought a motion to dismiss the application for failing to disclose a prima facie case, arguing that probationary employees do not have access to the grievance and arbitration procedure under the collective agreement.

The Board dismissed the union's motion, finding that probationary employees are entitled to union representation and that it could not be said with certainty that the applicant had no reasonable likelihood of success based solely on his allegations.

The matter was referred to consultation.

Curtis Steeves v. Teamsters Local Union 938, 2000 CanLII 7536

Harry Freedman

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 26, 2000

Application adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.

The applicant union filed an application against the responding parties.

On the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the application sine die and waived the parties' obligation to file representations unless the application proceeds.

The application will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed within one year.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Breton Park (Collegeway) Contractors Inc. and Granite Gate II Development Inc., 2000 CanLII 6473

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 26, 2000

Extension of time granted for late-filed application for review of an order to pay.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Employment Standards Officer's order to pay three days after the 45-day statutory deadline.

The applicant explained that the delay was due to an administrative error in sending the application materials to the Ministry of Labour instead of the Board.

The Board granted an extension of time under section 68(4) of the Employment Standards Act, finding that the applicant intended to file on time, the delay was short, and the prejudice to the applicant outweighed any prejudice to the responding parties.

All In One Canada Inc. v. Katherine Blais, Mark Shurvin and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 8259

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 26, 2000

Grievance allowed by default; employer ordered to pay unremitted contributions and costs.

The applicant referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding party failed to remit contributions and deductions for July 2000.

The responding party failed to file a response.

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

The Board declared the responding party bound by the collective agreement, found it violated the agreement, and ordered it to pay $576.44 in contributions and $664.00 in costs.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Alcor Investment Group Inc., 2000 CanLII 6555

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 25, 2000

Grievance referral withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicants requested to withdraw their referral of a grievance to the Board.

The Board granted the request and the referral was withdrawn.

Ontario Pipe Trades Council v. Darryl Gueguen c.o.b. as Countryside Plumbing & Heating, 2000 CanLII 10503

Harry Freedman