H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 21, 1996

Request for reconsideration of spoiled ballot decision denied; ballot did not clearly indicate voter intent.

The applicant and intervenor employer requested reconsideration of a Board decision that found a ballot to be spoiled.

They argued the Board erred by relying on unreported decisions without seeking submissions and that the decision departed from Board policy.

The Board dismissed the request, finding that the parties had full opportunity to argue the legal principle regarding spoiled ballots, and that the Board was not required to seek submissions on cases that merely confirmed established principles.

The Board maintained that the ballot did not clearly indicate the voter's intent.

Stephen R. Gerber v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353, 1996 CanLII 11119

J James Nyman

38 cases1981–2016

E. T. McDermott

15 cases1980–1996

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 3, 1996

Representation vote threshold under Bill 7 is based on union's estimate, not actual unit composition.

The union applied for certification to represent casual recreation employees of the City of Toronto.

The City argued that a representation vote should not have been ordered because the union did not establish that it had the support of 40% of the actual employees in the unit, claiming the unit was much larger than the union estimated.

The Board held that under the new Bill 7 amendments to the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the 40% threshold for ordering a quick representation vote is determined based solely on the union's estimate of the bargaining unit size in its application, not on a definitive factual finding of the unit's actual composition.

The union won the representation vote, and the Board ordered that a certificate issue.

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79 v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto, 1996 CanLII 11115

M. Lewis

11 cases1991–2001

Martin Addario

15 cases1981–2016

Kirsten Ramage

1 case1996–1996

Brian Short

1 case1996–1996

O. R. McGuire

OLRB0 cases1994–1997

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 10, 1996

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRB0 cases1986–1999

Unfair labour practice complaint dismissed; Board declined to inquire to avoid interfering with collective bargaining.

The applicant trade union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging various violations of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 by the responding employer.

The Board declared a sale of business had occurred and amended the responding party's name.

However, the Board exercised its discretion under section 96 of the Act not to inquire further into the complaint, finding that litigating the matter would likely interfere with ongoing collective bargaining between the parties.

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Local Lodge 1922 v. Orenda Aerospace Corporation, 1996 CanLII 11144

Lynn Harnden

6 cases1996–2016

J. Raso

19 cases1992–2001

Orval R. McGuire

OLRB0 cases1995–1997

K. G. O'Neil

OLRB0 cases1988–1998

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 10, 1996

Certification application dismissed due to employer support for the applicant union under section 15.

The Christian Labour Association of Canada (CLAC) applied for certification to displace the incumbent union, Local 47, as the bargaining agent for roofers at Covertite Eastern Limited.

Local 47 alleged that the employer and working foremen unlawfully supported CLAC's organizing campaign.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the employer, motivated by a desire for lower labour rates, clearly communicated its preference for CLAC to the employees and linked future work opportunities to supporting CLAC over Local 47.

Concluding that this constituted employer support under section 15 of the Labour Relations Act, the Board dismissed CLAC's certification application.

Christian Labour Association of Canada, Construction Workers Local 52 v. Covertite Eastern Limited, 1996 CanLII 11156

G. F. Luborsky

10 cases1983–1999

R. M. Sloan

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 10, 1996

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2025

Union's proposed departmental bargaining unit for golf club food and beverage staff found inappropriate.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit comprised exclusively of the food and beverage staff at a public golf and country club.

The employer argued that the appropriate unit should be an 'all employee' unit, including pro shop and grounds maintenance staff, due to the functional integration of the club's operations.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the golf club operated as a highly integrated enterprise, with significant coordination and shared duties among the various departments.

The Board concluded that carving out a departmental bargaining unit for the food and beverage staff would cause undue fragmentation and serious labour relations problems.

Consequently, the proposed bargaining unit was deemed inappropriate, and the union withdrew its application with leave of the Board.

United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 206 v. Lionhead Golf & Country Club, 1996 CanLII 11210

Russell G. Goodfellow

OLRB0 cases1993–2000

O. R. McGuire

OLRB0 cases1994–1997

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 1996

Union certified for production and maintenance employees; objection to combined bargaining unit dismissed.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of employees at the responding party's plant.

Following a representation vote in favour of the union, a group of maintenance employees objected to being included in the same bargaining unit as production employees.

The Board dismissed the objection without a hearing, noting it is common practice to include production and maintenance employees in a single unit and there was no evidence that the agreed-upon unit lacked a sufficiently coherent community of interest.

A certificate was issued to the applicant.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Manac, A Division of the Canam Manac Group Inc., 1996 CanLII 11168

N. L. Jesin

70 cases1987–2001

F. G. Hamilton

28 cases1980–2001

W. H. Wightman

OLRB0 cases1981–1996

M. K. Joachim

OLRB0 cases1995–1995

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 12, 1995

Bank breached collective agreement by subcontracting to non-signatory after Board decision ended estoppel.

The union referred a grievance to arbitration alleging that the Bank breached the subcontracting provision of the provincial collective agreement by contracting with a non-signatory.

In a previous decision, the Board held that the union was estopped from relying on the subcontracting provisions until the issuance of that decision on May 3, 1995.

The Bank argued that the bidding process for the disputed project began before May 3, 1995, and therefore the estoppel still applied.

The Board found that the Bank entered into the contract after May 3, 1995, and was therefore bound to comply with the collective agreement.

The Board held that the Bank breached the agreement and remitted the matter to the parties to determine damages.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union 2050 v. Toronto Dominion Bank, 1995 CanLII 10032

Melissa Kronick

19 cases1994–2014

F. G. Hamilton

28 cases1980–2001

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 27, 1995

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2025

Board ordered combination of two craft bargaining units, finding no statutory bar.

The applicant union applied to combine two separate craft bargaining units (press/photomechanical and mail room) at the responding party's newspaper printing plant.

The employer opposed the combination, arguing that the Labour Relations Act does not permit the combination of craft units and that it would cause serious labour relations problems due to differing interests.

The Board held that section 6(3) of the Act does not bar the combination of craft units under section 7.

Finding that combination would facilitate viable and stable collective bargaining and reduce fragmentation without causing serious labour relations problems, the Board granted the application and ordered the units combined.

A dissenting member would have dismissed the application.

Graphic Communications International Union, Local 500M v. Metroland Printing, Publishing & Distributing Ltd., 1995 CanLII 10005

R. M. Sloan

K. G. O'Neil

OLRB0 cases1988–1998

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 10, 1995

Board orders combination of craft and non-craft bargaining units to reduce fragmentation in newspaper industry.

The union applied to combine a newly certified maintenance bargaining unit with two pre-existing units (a craft unit of pressmen and a departmental unit of truck drivers) at the employer's newspaper operation.

The employer opposed the combination, arguing that section 6(3) of the Labour Relations Act precluded combining a craft unit with non-craft units.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that the mandatory nature of section 6(3) at the point of certification does not override the Board's discretion to combine units under section 7.

Finding that the combination would facilitate viable and stable collective bargaining and reduce fragmentation without causing serious labour relations problems, the Board ordered the three units combined.

One Board member dissented.

The Graphic Communications International Union Local N-1 v. The Windsor Star, A Division of Southam Inc., 1995 CanLII 9926

Steve Mendelssohn

Micheil Russell

6 cases1995–2021

Michael A. Church

51 cases1982–2026

F. G. Hamilton

28 cases1980–2001

S. C. Laing

OLRB0 cases1994–2000

Lee Shouldice

OLRB0 cases1994–1999

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 5, 1995

Union certified for one store; employer's objections to membership evidence and campaign literature dismissed.

The union applied for certification for two of the employer's grocery stores.

The employer and a group of objecting employees raised preliminary issues regarding the timeliness of petition documents, the sufficiency of the union's membership evidence, and the propriety of the union's campaign literature.

The Board ruled that the petition in the first file was untimely, but the petition in the second file was timely.

The Board dismissed the employer's objections to the membership evidence, finding that the lack of a witness signature and the pre-signing of the receiver's line did not invalidate the cards.

The Board also found that the union's campaign literature did not improperly trade on the Board's neutrality.

The Board certified the union for the first store and directed a further hearing for the second store.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC v. Oshawa Group Limited, 1995 CanLII 10061

Steve Cork

2 cases1994–1995

Mark Rowlinson

21 cases1995–2013

Joseph Liberman

Suspended Administratively53 cases1980–2001

Fil Falbo

2 cases1995–1998

Doug Dunsmuir

2 cases1994–1995

Brian Shell

Not Practising Law66 cases1981–2021

Orval R. McGuire

OLRB0 cases1995–1997

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 14, 1995

D. L. Gee

OLRB0 cases1994–2001

An employer cannot request a final offer vote after first agreement arbitration has been initiated.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding whether an employer can request a final offer vote under section 40 of the Labour Relations Act after first agreement arbitration has been initiated under section 41.

The union argued that because section 41(13) prohibits strikes or lock-outs once first agreement arbitration is initiated, the precondition for a final offer vote cannot be met.

The employer argued that the provisions could operate simultaneously.

The Board held that the opening words of section 40 establish a precondition that strike or lock-out activity must be available.

Since section 41(13) eliminates the possibility of a strike or lock-out, an employer cannot request a final offer vote after first agreement arbitration has been initiated.

United Steelworkers of America v. Royalguard Vinyl Co., A Division of Royplast Limited, 1995 CanLII 9959

Susan Ballantyne

18 cases1992–2013

Andrew Tremayne

9 cases1994–2012

Andr6 Champagne

S. C. Laing

OLRB0 cases1994–2000

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 6, 1995

Application dismissed; failure to pay contingent wage increase during statutory freeze did not violate the Act.

The union alleged that the employer violated the statutory freeze under section 81 of the Labour Relations Act by failing to pay a 3% wage increase to employees earning under $30,000.

The employer argued that the increase was contingent on funding from the City of Ottawa, which was not provided due to budget constraints.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the wage increase was not a guaranteed term or condition of employment, and that 'business as usual' for the employer included responding to budget constraints imposed by the City.

The Ottawa-Carleton Public Employees Union Local 503 v. The Ottawa Public Library Board, 1995 CanLII 9953

Joanne McMahon

2 cases1995–2007

Carl Peterson

53 cases1984–2023

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

Roman Stoykewych

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 28, 1995

Board ordered dovetailing of seniority lists following combination of bargaining units to resolve bargaining impasse.

The employer applied to combine the 'parts' and 'manufacturing' bargaining units following a corporate reorganization.

The parties agreed on a single collective agreement but could not resolve how to merge the seniority lists.

The employer proposed 'dovetailing' based on date of hire, while the union advanced conflicting positions from the two former units.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board exercised its discretion under subsection 7(5) of the Labour Relations Act to resolve the impasse, adopting the employer's dovetailing proposal as the most equitable resolution that respects the employees' accumulated seniority.

FMG Timberjack Inc. v. Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union, 1995 CanLII 10042

Sharon Gall

In Private Practice11 cases1994–2015

Michael Klug

28 cases1992–2024

Margaret Gavins

2 cases1995–1999

John M. Wigle

6 cases1993–2016

John Mastoras

Cynthia Watson

8 cases1993–2015

Roman Stoykewych

R. M. Sloan

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 14, 1995

Termination application given priority over combination application; petition found voluntary and representation vote ordered.

The union applied to combine the full-time and part-time bargaining units at a supermarket.

Shortly after, an employee applied to terminate the union's bargaining rights for the full-time unit.

The Board determined that the termination application should be given procedural priority over the combination application to preserve the employees' representation rights.

On the merits of the termination application, the Board found that the petition in support of termination was voluntary, despite the presence of the employer's children in the bargaining unit and the manner in which signatures were collected.

A representation vote was ordered.

United Food & Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Suedon Foods Ltd., 1995 CanLII 10045

Theodore Crljenica

Licence Surrendered - Administrative Surrender of Licence7 cases1987–1996

Mike McCreary

20 cases1991–2019

Caroline Cohen

113 cases1994–2025

Roman Stoykewych

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 3, 1995

Constitutional objection dismissed; provincial operations not sufficiently integrated into federal works to oust provincial jurisdiction.

The applicants brought an application under sections 1(4) and 64 of the Labour Relations Act following the purchase of several farm co-operatives.

The responding trade unions raised a preliminary constitutional objection, arguing that the Ontario Labour Relations Board lacked jurisdiction because the applicants operated feed mills and seed cleaning mills, which are declared to be works for the general advantage of Canada under the Canada Wheat Board Act.

The Board applied the core/subsidiary integration test and found that the retail and other provincial operations were not sufficiently integrated into the federal works to bring the entire enterprise under federal jurisdiction.

The constitutional objection was dismissed, and the Board assumed jurisdiction to hear the merits of the application.

La Co-operative De Point-Aux-Roches v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 278W, 1995 CanLII 10044

Susan Scott

Deceased1 case1995–1995

Sheila Turkington

2 cases1995–2006

Scott Williams

13 cases1994–2016

Penny Tyrrel

Patricia Burt

Michael Wright

7 cases1993–2001

Mark Stevenson

Kevin Banks

2 cases1993–1995

Dr. Krishna Kadiyala

Bob Moore

R. M. Sloan

Louisa M. Davie

OLRB0 cases1988–1996

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 18, 1995

Board confirms employer's assignment of library reference work to both Staff and Faculty Associations.

The employer, Algoma University College, filed a jurisdictional dispute complaint regarding the assignment of library reference desk duties and library tours.

The work had been assigned to members of both the Staff Association and the Faculty Association.

The Board found that the work was normally performed by members of both associations and that there was a clear overlap in jurisdiction.

Considering past practice, area practice, and factors of economy and efficiency, the Board confirmed the employer's assignment of the disputed work to members of both associations.

Board of Governors of Algoma University College v. Algoma University College Staff Association and Algoma University College Faculty Association, 1995 CanLII 9990

Walter Thornton

47 cases1986–2001

M. I. Rotman

6 cases1994–2001

W. H. Wightman

OLRB0 cases1981–1996

Roman Stoykewych

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 21, 1994

Discharge for poor performance without progressive discipline lacked just cause; reinstatement ordered.

The applicant trade union alleged that the responding party employer violated section 81.2 of the Labour Relations Act by discharging an employee without just cause prior to the settlement of a first collective agreement.

The employer argued the discharge was justified due to the employee's poor work performance and failure to improve after a 'last chance' warning.

The Board found that while the employee had been careless on several occasions, the 'last chance' warning was an inappropriate escalation of progressive discipline given his prior discipline-free record.

The Board concluded the discharge was without just cause, substituted a written warning, and ordered the employee reinstated with full compensation.

Office and Professional Employees' International Union, Local 343 v. Ombudsman Ontario, 1994 CanLII 9801

Richard Anstruther

7 cases1994–2001

Mike Mody

1 case1994–1994

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 5, 1994

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2025

Union certified; employee allegations of intimidation and coercion during organizing campaign dismissed for lack of evidence.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A group of objecting employees alleged that union organizers used intimidation, coercion, and material misrepresentations to collect membership cards.

The Board heard evidence from several objecting employees but found no substance to the allegations.

The Board concluded that the employees were not coerced or intimidated, and that any statements made by organizers were either salesmanship or did not overcome the employees' free will.

Finding no taint in the membership evidence, the Board certified the union without a representation vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Dualex Enterprises Inc., 1994 CanLII 9795

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

Pamela Chapman

OLRB0 cases1994–2012

H. Peacock