H. Peacock

Tony DiBartolomew

In Private Practice53 cases2001–2026

Shane Smith

Mini Jones

Leslee Wills

2 cases2000–2001

Larry H. Abrams

Kim Birmingham

2 cases2001–2001

Frank Luce

22 cases1980–2001

D. Wray

22 cases1980–2023

Dorothy Gossi

Dan MacPherson

Chuck R. Robertson

3 cases1988–2001

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 8, 2001

Representation vote delayed pending determination of whether existing collective agreement extended bargaining rights to new facility.

The CAW and UFCW filed competing applications for certification regarding employees at Coca-Cola's new Brampton facility.

UFCW Local 175 claimed existing bargaining rights based on a collective agreement provision extending rights to new facilities within a 50-mile radius if staffed by its members.

The Board declined to immediately order a representation vote, finding that the fundamental issue of whether UFCW Local 175 already held bargaining rights for the facility needed to be determined first.

The matter was scheduled for further hearing.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers' Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company, 2001 CanLII 16583

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 7, 2001

Union certified pending final resolution of disputed bargaining unit positions.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The parties agreed on the bargaining unit description, except for three positions.

A representation vote was held, and more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the union, regardless of the outcome of the disputed positions.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 9(2) of the Act to certify the union pending the final resolution of the bargaining unit composition, to assist the parties in commencing collective agreement negotiations.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Victorian Order of Nurses, Ottawa-Carleton Branch, 2001 CanLII 20411

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

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

The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Central Park Lodges c.o.b. Maitland Manor, 2001 CanLII 13293

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board at the applicant's request.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application.

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

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Greenlawn and Victoria Memorial Gardens and Crematorium, 2001 CanLII 14101

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application via a letter dated May 30, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Newcastle Block Ltd., 2001 CanLII 11864

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Board directs representation vote in union certification application.

The applicant trade 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 of the union at the time the application was made.

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

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Haakon Industries (Canada) Ltd., 2001 CanLII 12577

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 31, 2001

Applications adjourned sine die for up to one year upon applicant's request.

The applicant requested an adjournment of its applications.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, adjourning the matters sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which they will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The Professional Association of Canadian Talent v. Dufferin Gate Productions Limites/L23 Production Inc., 2001 CanLII 15066

Stephen Raymond

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 31, 2001

Request for reconsideration dismissed as the Board had already confirmed the collective agreement was properly ratified.

The applicant union requested reconsideration of a prior Board decision, arguing the Board failed to answer whether a collective agreement was ratified in accordance with the Act.

The Board dismissed the request, noting its prior decision explicitly stated the collective agreement was ratified and the vote complied with the Act.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. 1318359 Ontario Limited c.o.b. as Ryder Logistics, 2001 CanLII 5748

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 31, 2001

Matter adjourned sine die for up to one year upon request of the responding party.

The responding party requested an adjournment sine die.

The Board granted the request, adjourning the matter for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

Toronto Star Newspapers Limited v. Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 87-M, Southern Ontario Newspaper Guild, 2001 CanLII 5934

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 30, 2001

Representation vote ordered in application to terminate union's bargaining rights; request to delay vote denied.

The applicant employees applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found the application timely and that at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the union.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held on June 1, 2001, rejecting the applicant's request to delay the vote until June 8, as the absence of some employees was not a sufficiently compelling reason to delay the vote beyond the normal five-day period.

Employees of Accucut Profile and Grinding Ltd. v. United Steelworkers of America and or Local 5338, 2001 CanLII 10933

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 30, 2001

Decertification application dismissed for failing to describe bargaining unit and providing photocopied documentary evidence.

The applicant applied to terminate the responding party union's bargaining rights under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board dismissed the application because it failed to set out a description of the bargaining unit, making it impossible to determine a voting constituency.

Furthermore, the documentary evidence filed was a photocopy of a letter addressed to the employer, which did not satisfy the requirement for an original document clearly expressing the employees' wish not to be represented by the union.

The application was dismissed without prejudice to filing a fresh application.

Arlene Giroux v. Local 183 Service Employees Int’l Union, 2001 CanLII 4710

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 29, 2001

Union certification granted following a successful representation vote.

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

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 Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Comhold Investments Limited, 2001 CanLII 13006

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 28, 2001

Union certified as bargaining agent following successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Great Beginnings Child Centered Co-operative Inc., 2001 CanLII 19337

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 28, 2001

Union certification granted following a successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

United Steelworkers of America v. Sico Inc., 2001 CanLII 14056

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 28, 2001

Union certified as bargaining agent following successful representation vote.

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

Brewery, General and Professional Workers’ Union v. Re/max Cornerstone Realty Ltd., 2001 CanLII 10414

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2001

Representation vote ordered with ballot box sealed in hospital service employees certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of service employees at Markham Stouffville Hospital.

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

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to obtain a representation vote.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, with the ballot box sealed pending resolution of the bargaining unit description dispute.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Markham Stouffville Hospital, 2001 CanLII 7236

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. R. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2001

First contract application adjourned sine die pending resolution of related decertification application.

The applicant union brought an application for first contract arbitration under section 43 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

A separate application for decertification under section 63 of the Act was also filed regarding the same bargaining unit.

Pursuant to sections 43(23.1) and 43(23.2) of the Act, the Board is mandated to deal with the decertification application before proceeding with the first contract application.

Accordingly, the Board adjourned the first contract hearing sine die until a final decision is rendered in the decertification matter.

Service Employees’ International Union, Local 210 v. Saint Elizabeth Health Care, 2001 CanLII 11822

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 2001

Representation vote ordered for casino employees; employer's request to seal ballot box denied.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees at Casino Sault Ste.

Marie.

The responding party disputed the bargaining unit description and the membership evidence, requesting that the ballot box be sealed.

The Board found sufficient membership support to order a representation vote and declined to seal the ballot box, noting that statutory and evidentiary issues could be addressed after the vote.

A dissenting member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Service Employees International Union – Local 528 v. Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, 2001 CanLII 19520

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock