H. Peacock

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

Union certified as bargaining agent for registered nurses following successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for registered nurses at Tilbury Manor Nursing Home.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no statements of desire filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the union as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Diversicare Canada Management Services Co., Inc. c.o.b. as Tilbury Manor Nursing Home, 2001 CanLII 5051

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

Union certified as bargaining agent for paramedical employees following successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for paramedical employees of the responding party hospital.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Board certified the union.

A certificate was ordered to issue for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Wilson Memorial General Hospital, 2001 CanLII 16456

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

Representation vote ordered in certification application with ballot box sealed due to bargaining unit dispute.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees at the responding party's manufacturing plant.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and proposed a different unit description, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the applicant's proposed unit could be appropriate and that the union had the requisite 40 percent membership support.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, with the ballot box sealed pending resolution of the significant numerical difference and the appropriate bargaining unit description.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc., 2001 CanLII 7927

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

Union certification granted following a successful representation vote by the employees.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Board found the agreed-upon bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant and cancelled previously set meeting and hearing dates.

IWA - Canada v. North Shore Steel Products Limited, 2001 CanLII 18480

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 3, 2001

Representation vote directed in certification application despite employer's section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The majority of the Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to direct a representation vote and have it counted, with segregated ballots for disputed positions.

The dissenting Board member would have directed the ballot box to be sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

United Steelworkers of America v. Stellarc Precision Bar Inc., 2001 CanLII 3487

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 3, 2001

Representation vote ordered in union certification application.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held on July 5, 2001, and directed that any ballots cast by individuals whose inclusion in the bargaining unit is disputed be segregated.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Steeves & Rozema Enterprises Ltd. c.o.b. Twin Lakes Terrace, 2001 CanLII 14187

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 3, 2001

Board directed employer to produce agreed documents or file submissions regarding refusals prior to hearing.

The applicant union requested an order directing the responding party employer to produce certain documents prior to a scheduled hearing.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the responding party to produce any agreed-upon documents by July 5, 2001, and to file submissions regarding any refused documents by the same date.

Any remaining disputes over production were to be addressed at the outset of the hearing on July 6, 2001.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 593 v. Petro-Canada, 2001 CanLII 12295

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 29, 2001

Applications listed for hearing; preliminary objections regarding late filing deferred to the hearing panel.

The applicant requested that the Board schedule the applications for hearing and bar the responding party from presenting evidence due to a late response.

The responding party subsequently filed its responses, raising preliminary objections that the Board should defer to the grievance procedure.

The Board directed that the applications be listed for hearing together and deferred the preliminary issues to the hearing panel.

Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation v. Bluewater District School Board, 2001 CanLII 3710

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Caroline Rowan

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 29, 2001

Union decertified after majority of employees voted in opposition during representation vote.

The applicant filed an application to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of Loeb Fisher Street.

Rosemarie Guillemette v. U.F.C.W. Locals 175 and 633, 2001 CanLII 18795

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 28, 2001

Union decertified following a representation vote where a majority of employees voted in opposition.

The applicant filed an application to decertify the responding party trade union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and with no statement of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.

Sabrina D’Alessandro v. United Food and Commercial Local 1000A, 2001 CanLII 15915

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 27, 2001

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1587, requested to withdraw its application against the Greater Toronto Transit Authority (Go Transit).

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1587 v. Greater Toronto Transit Authority (Go Transit), 2001 CanLII 4609

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 27, 2001

Representation vote directed in union certification application despite dispute over bargaining unit description.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

Due to a dispute over the precise description of the bargaining unit, the Board directed a representation vote for a defined voting constituency, with the bargaining unit description dispute to be resolved later if necessary.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Hamilton Physiotherapy Clinic, 2001 CanLII 16095

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 22, 2001

Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application against the responding employer.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

United Steelworkers of America v. Airboss of America Corp., 2001 CanLII 12664

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 21, 2001

Board orders representation vote in union certification application, with disputed ballots to be segregated.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party taxi company.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found the applicant to be a trade union and determined it had established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to warrant a representation vote.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, and directed that ballots cast by individuals in disputed positions (drivers, call takers, and dispatchers) be segregated pending further resolution.

Northern Ontario Joint Council of the Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union v. 510792 Ontario Inc., 2001 CanLII 6442

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 21, 2001

Representation vote ordered in competing union certification applications for Coca-Cola Brampton facility employees.

The Board considered competing applications for certification by the CAW and UFCW, as well as a termination application and an unfair labour practice complaint regarding employees at Coca-Cola's Brampton facility.

Finding that both unions had demonstrated the appearance of at least 40% support in their proposed bargaining units, the Board ordered a representation vote to determine the employees' choice of bargaining agent.

The Board deferred determination of a section 8.1 issue raised by the employer regarding the bargaining unit size.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company, 2001 CanLII 16230

Russel Zinn

7 cases1989–2001

Rodney G. Walsh

1 case2001–2001

Nancy Rosenberg

13 cases1992–2001

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 19, 2001

Community Living Association operating group homes for developmentally disabled persons designated as a hospital under HLDAA.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board asking whether the Community Living Association (Lanark County) is a 'hospital' within the meaning of the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act.

The employer operates group homes for individuals with severe developmental disabilities who require 24-hour supervision and care.

The Board concluded that the services provided by the employer involve the observation, care, or treatment of persons affected with physical or mental illness.

The Board advised the Minister that the employer is a hospital within the meaning of the Act.

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1521-02 v. Community Living Association, (Lanark County), 2001 CanLII 7960

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 14, 2001

Applications adjourned sine die for up to one year on consent of the parties.

The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment, noting that if no party requests to proceed within that time, the matters will be deemed terminated without further notice.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. Specialty Care Inc., 2001 CanLII 16619

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

Anthony Brown

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 13, 2001

Representation vote directed for paramedical employees in union certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent paramedical employees of the responding party hospital.

Upon reviewing the application and membership evidence, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the support of at least forty percent of the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Wilson Memorial Hospital (Paramedic Unit), 2001 CanLII 15478

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Anthony Brown