Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 30, 2000

Motion granted directing a subpoenaed witness to attend the next scheduled hearing date.

The applicant moved for an order directing a witness, who had already been personally served with a summons and conduct money, to attend the next scheduled hearing date.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the motion and directed the witness to attend.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council v. Teperman Wrecking Inc., 2000 CanLII 3779

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 30, 2000

Motion to strike paragraphs from applicant's statement of fact granted in part.

The responding party union brought a motion to strike several paragraphs from the applicant's statement of fact in a proceeding concerning the propriety of union referrals under section 75 of the Act.

The Board granted the motion in part, striking paragraphs that were irrelevant or previously addressed in a document production decision, and dismissing the motion with respect to the remaining paragraphs.

James McKeary v. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Local 128, 2000 CanLII 12334

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 23, 2000

Applicant directed to provide proof of fax delivery of grievance referral or face dismissal.

The applicant filed a referral of a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, certifying that the required documents were delivered to the responding party by fax.

Counsel for the responding party claimed they did not receive the referral form and requested the file be reprocessed.

The Board noted that the responding party did not raise this issue immediately upon receiving the Board's confirmation of filing.

The Board directed the applicant to provide evidence establishing that the faxed documents were actually received by the responding party, failing which the referral would be dismissed.

Masonry Industry Employers’ Council of Ontario v. Brick Employee Bargaining Agency, Local 1 o/a Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada Local 1, 2000 CanLII 6544

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Employer ordered to pay damages for waiting time after failing to respond to grievance referral.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer failed to send a laid-off employee's final pay and termination documents within 24 hours as required by the collective agreement.

The responding party failed to file a response.

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 employer violated the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $1,464.48 in damages for five days' waiting time, plus $214.00 for filing fees.

The applicant's claim for interest and costs was denied for lack of particulars.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 736 v. Spencer Steel Ltd., 2000 CanLII 3139

Harry Freedman

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board acknowledged the request and the application was withdrawn.

CEP v. Malette Craft Pulp and Power, 2000 CanLII 3425

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Board directs representation vote in construction industry certification application, deferring trade union status determination.

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

The Board found that the applicant had not previously established its status as a trade union and would be required to do so.

However, based on the membership evidence filed, the Board was satisfied that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit appeared to be members of the applicant.

The Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken.

Ontario Pipe Trades Council v. Rodco Mechanical Inc., 2000 CanLII 10206

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.

On the agreement of the parties, the Board adjourned the application sine die, noting it would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed within one year.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Elta Gas Services Ltd., 2000 CanLII 9046

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 to resolve the matter.

The Board ordered the disbursement of the funds held in trust by the Director in accordance with the settlement and terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

ADP Canada v. Tom Lloyd, 2000 CanLII 2436

Yves Tessier

2 cases2000–2001

Elizabeth Mitchell

39 cases1988–2007

David Dwoskin

J. G. Knight

Harry Freedman

A. Haward

Related employer declaration denied where principal started a new business after the original business was sold.

The applicant trade union sought a declaration that Bruno Facchin Interiors Ltd. was bound by a collective agreement as a result of a sale of business from R & B Painting Ltd., or alternatively, that the two companies were related employers under common control and direction.

The Board found that there was no sale of business, as R & B's business had been sold to a third party that subsequently went bankrupt.

While the Board found that the two companies were related and under common control, it declined to exercise its discretion to issue a single employer declaration.

The Board concluded that the principal had started a new, distinct business and that the union's bargaining rights attached to the original business, not to the principal personally.

The application was dismissed, with one Board Member dissenting.

International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades v. Bruno Facchin Interiors Ltd. and R & B Painting Ltd., 2000 CanLII 2499

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 20, 2000

Interim order issued returning undisputed wage funds to employer after employee withdrew employment standards claim.

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

After the applicant paid the required funds in trust, the claimant employee withdrew his claim due to a settlement.

The applicant requested the return of all funds, including the administration fee.

The Ministry opposed returning the administration fee, arguing the Board lacked jurisdiction.

The Board issued an interim order directing the return of the undisputed wage portion ($2,281.32) to the applicant, but held that a hearing was statutorily required to determine the return of the administration fee unless the Ministry waived its right to a hearing.

Equifax Canada Inc. v. Bandhu, 2000 CanLII 7516

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 16, 2000

Union's request to reconsider adjournment of health and safety appeal dismissed.

The appellant employer and the Ministry of Labour agreed to adjourn an occupational health and safety appeal sine die pending the completion of equivalency studies.

The union requested reconsideration of the adjournment, arguing it was not a party to the agreement.

The Board dismissed the reconsideration request, finding the union failed to contradict evidence that it had previously agreed to defer to the Ministry's expertise on the matter.

The adjournment remained in place, subject to any party's right to request the matter be relisted.

Sifto Canada Inc. v. Al Thibert and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 1165

Neal E. Sommer

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 16, 2000

Two disputed kitchen installers found to be employees/dependent contractors eligible to vote in certification application.

In an application for certification, the Board held a hearing to determine the voter eligibility of two disputed individuals, Jose Martins and Edmund Cordero.

The responding party argued both were independent contractors.

The Board applied the four-fold test and other criteria to determine their employment status.

The Board found that Martins, who was paid a piecework rate but subject to significant control and had no chance of profit or risk of loss, was an employee who performed bargaining unit work on the application date.

The Board also found that Cordero, despite earning income from other sources and sharing work with his brother, was economically dependent on the responding party for kitchen installation work and was therefore a dependent contractor or employee.

Both were deemed eligible voters.

Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Concord Kitchens Ltd., 2000 CanLII 4282

Nicholas Keresztesi

3 cases1998–2000

Joseph Liberman

Suspended Administratively53 cases1980–2001

J. David Watson

19 cases1986–2020

Frank Sala

Frank D'Abbondanza

5 cases1990–2001

Antonio Marano

Andra M. Pollak

2 cases2000–2007

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 15, 2000

Board issued procedural directions on pleadings and document production in a related employer application.

The applicant union brought an application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and referred a grievance to arbitration under section 133.

At a pre-hearing consultation, the parties agreed to adjourn the grievance referral sine die pending the determination of the related employer/sale of business application.

The intervenor union withdrew from the application but reserved the right to intervene in the grievance proceeding.

The Board issued directions regarding the filing of amended pleadings and the production of documents, and referred the application to the Registrar to be listed for hearing before another panel.

The International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Local 31 v. 1249762 Ontario Inc. o/a Mega City Tiling, 2000 CanLII 7939

Harry Freedman

G. Pickell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 13, 2000

G. McMenemy

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

Consent order issued declaring collective agreement violation and directing payment of $5,150.00 in damages.

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 a Memorandum of Agreement settling the matter.

The Board issued a consent order declaring that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement, had violated article 19, and directed the responding party to pay $5,150.00 in damages to the applicant.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Local 2, Toronto/Barrie v. Limen Masonry Limited, 2000 CanLII 6775

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 13, 2000

Application for review terminated and funds ordered disbursed in accordance with Minutes of Settlement.

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

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing that one of the named individuals was never a director or partner, but only an employee, and that the Order to Pay should be amended to delete him as an employer.

The Board ordered the Ministry of Labour to disburse the $2,304.24 held in trust back to that individual in accordance with the settlement, and terminated the application.

Insheel Inc. v. Le, 2000 CanLII 3606

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 13, 2000

Board orders disbursement of funds held in trust pursuant to 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 three of the four affected employees entered into Minutes of Settlement to disburse the funds held in trust by the Director.

The Board ordered the funds disbursed in accordance with the settlement, subject to any timely objections from the non-signatory employee or the Ministry of Labour, and terminated the application.

1008637 Ontario Limited v. Cowles, 2000 CanLII 1573

Norman Keith

5 cases1981–2000

Michael Brooks

Katherine Livingstone

D. Belonger

C. Sherriff-Scott

Carl Peterson

53 cases1984–2023

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 6, 2000

Motion to intervene granted as intervenor demonstrated direct and substantial interest in constructor status determination.

The appellant appealed an inspector's order directing it to provide a Notice of Project as a constructor under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Canadian Institute of Public and Private Real Estate Companies (CIPPREC) brought a motion to intervene in the appeal.

The Board granted the motion, finding that CIPPREC demonstrated a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the proceedings, as the determination of whether the appellant was a constructor would have wide implications for the real estate development and construction industries.

Minto Yorkville Inc. v. Bibeau, 2000 CanLII 11084

Harry Freedman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 1, 2000

Appellants' pre-hearing request to strike responding party's submissions dismissed as premature.

The appellants requested that the Board strike certain paragraphs from the employer's submissions, alleging that the responding parties failed to promptly meet to discuss pre-hearing issues regarding particulars and document production.

The appellants also alleged they were unlawfully dismissed from their employment contrary to section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Board found that the request to strike the submissions was premature, as a Labour Relations Officer had already scheduled a meeting with the parties, and the Board's previous decision required such requests to be made after that meeting.

The request was dismissed without prejudice.

W. McNaught, M. Bertoia and J. Mullins v. Toronto Transit Commission et al., 2000 CanLII 2711

Harry Freedman

G. Pickell

A. Haward