H. Peacock

Roman Stoykewych

OLRB0 cases1993–1997

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 3, 1994

Board schedules hearing and directs pleadings to resolve seniority list dispute following bargaining unit combination.

The applicant employer sought to combine the parts and manufacturing bargaining units and requested that their seniority lists be dovetailed.

The responding trade union agreed to the combination but argued for end-tailing the parts unit.

The Board previously directed the combination and ordered the parties to attempt a negotiated resolution of the seniority issue.

As the parties were unable to resolve the matter, the Board scheduled a hearing to adjudicate the outstanding remedial issues under section 7(5) of the Labour Relations Act and directed the parties to file further pleadings.

FMG Timberjack Inc. v. Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union, 1994 CanLII 9993

David L. Brisbin

8 cases1987–2001

W. N. Fraser

OLRB0 cases1988–2000

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 20, 1994

Excavation work at a landfill site was deemed landfill operations, not construction work; grievance dismissed.

The applicant union referred a grievance alleging the employer violated collective agreements by failing to apply them to excavation work at a landfill site.

As a preliminary matter, the Board had to determine whether the work was in the construction industry.

Based on an agreed statement of facts and a letter of understanding between the parties distinguishing landfill operations from construction work, the Board concluded the excavation work fell within the agreed definition of landfill operations.

The grievance was dismissed.

International Union of Operating Engineers and its Local 793 v. Robert Hume Construction Ltd., 1994 CanLII 9933

W. A. Correll

Pamela Chapman

OLRB0 cases1994–2012

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 26, 1994

Application to combine bargaining units dismissed as units were represented by separate local unions.

The employer applied to combine two bargaining units represented by two separate local unions affiliated with the same international union.

The responding unions requested that the application be dismissed without a hearing because section 7(1) of the Labour Relations Act requires the employees to be represented by the same trade union.

The Board found that the two local unions were separate entities and dismissed the application without a hearing.

FPC Flexible Packaging Corporation v. Graphic Communications International Union, Local N-1, 1994 CanLII 9838

W. A. Correll

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 18, 1994

Union did not breach duty to bargain in good faith by submitting new items to first contract arbitration.

The employer filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging the union breached its duty to bargain in good faith by submitting new and previously withdrawn items to a first contract arbitration board.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application, finding that interest arbitration is a substitute for bargaining and the statute does not restrict arbitration submissions to items previously negotiated.

The Board also declined to exercise its discretion to inquire into the complaint, noting the arbitration board had already assumed jurisdiction and ruled on the disputed items.

Centre Jubilee Centre v. United Steelworkers of America, 1994 CanLII 9833

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

Ken Petryshen

OLRB0 cases1986–2026

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 15, 1994

Application for successor employer declaration dismissed; purchase of closed hotel's assets did not constitute sale of business.

The union applied for a declaration that Sanford's Roadhouse Restaurant was a successor employer to the Waverly Hotel and therefore bound by its collective agreement.

The predecessor hotel had closed, and its assets were seized by a creditor.

Thirteen months later, the purchaser bought the building and some chattels, extensively renovated the premises, and opened a restaurant with a different business focus.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that while certain assets were transferred, an ongoing enterprise was not.

The Board concluded there was no sale of a business and dismissed the application.

The Hospitality, Commercial and Service Employees Union, Local 73 v. 967105 Ontario Limited, 1994 CanLII 9844

Pamela Chapman

OLRB0 cases1994–2012

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 9, 1994

D. G. Wozniak

OLRB0 cases1987–1995

Reprisal complaint dismissed; probationary employee terminated for poor performance, not for health and safety reasons.

The applicant, a probationary employee, alleged he was terminated as a reprisal for complaining about the availability of protective gloves and/or because he developed dermatitis from handling oiled parts.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application, finding that the employer discharged the applicant due to poor performance, erratic productivity, and poor attitude, rather than any health and safety animus.

The Board noted the applicant had not made any formal health and safety complaints prior to his termination and the employer had accommodated his request for gloves.

Mark Desipio v. Precision Engineering Company division of PECO Tool and Die Ltd., 1994 CanLII 9790

W. G. Phelps

8 cases1980–1994

Nelson Roland

67 cases1986–2008

Michel Vendette

M. E. Keenan

K. Brouillard

Cindy Read

2 cases1994–2022

B. Goodman

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

R. M. Sloan

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 2, 1994

Board declines to automatically apply existing collective agreement to newly combined bargaining unit without prior bargaining.

The union applied to have the Board address transitional issues arising from a previous order combining a newly-certified bargaining unit with an existing one.

The union argued that the terms of the existing collective agreement should automatically apply to the newly added employees, requiring minimal bargaining.

The employer argued that the new classifications had different hours, wages, and benefits, necessitating substantive negotiations to avoid anomalies.

The Board declined to make a direction under section 7(5) of the Labour Relations Act, finding that the parties had not engaged in meaningful collective bargaining to resolve the transitional issues themselves.

The Board directed the parties to assume the responsibilities of collective bargaining before seeking Board intervention.

Independent Canadian Transit Union and its Local 6 v. Olympia & York Developments Limited, 1994 CanLII 9785

Judith McCormack

H. Peacock

G. 0. Shamanski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 25, 1994

Interim reinstatement granted for two resident superintendents discharged during a union organizing campaign.

The applicant union sought an interim order under section 92.1 of the Labour Relations Act to reinstate two resident superintendents who were discharged during a union organizing campaign.

The Board applied its established test for interim relief, finding that the union had made out an arguable case of an unfair labour practice.

Balancing the harm, the Board concluded that the chilling effect of the discharges on the organizing campaign outweighed the employer's concerns about the employees' continued presence, especially since the employees still resided at the property.

The Board ordered the interim reinstatement of the employees pending the disposition of the main complaint.

United Steelworkers of America v. Shelter Canadian Properties Limited, 1994 CanLII 9881

Roman Stoykewych

OLRB0 cases1993–1997

H. Peacock

G. 0. Shamanski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 19, 1994

Applicant organization found to be a trade union despite technical irregularities in its formation process.

The applicant sought certification as the bargaining agent for employees of the responding party, seeking to displace the incumbent union.

As the applicant had not previously established its status as a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, a hearing was held.

The intervenor argued that the applicant failed to strictly follow the Board's five-step procedure for establishing trade union status, specifically regarding the ratification of its constitution and quorum requirements.

The Board found that the applicant substantially complied with the requirements, noting that the employees' actions at the organizational meeting demonstrated a clear intention to form a trade union and be bound by its constitution.

The Board concluded that the applicant is a viable organization capable of carrying out its statutory obligations and declared it a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Act.

Canadian Food and Allied Workers' Union v. Caterair Chateau Canada Limited, 1994 CanLII 9903

Michael D. Failes

9 cases1994–2010

Caroline Cohen

113 cases1994–2025

W. N. Fraser

OLRB0 cases1988–2000

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 13, 1994

Site-specific bargaining units found appropriate for school cleaning staff despite employer's centralized administration.

The union applied for certification of employees providing cleaning services at two specific schools.

The employer argued for a broader municipal or regional bargaining unit, citing its integrated workforce and central administration.

The Board found that the site-specific bargaining units proposed by the union were appropriate, noting that the workforce was stable with limited interchange between locations, and that site-specific units would not cause serious labour relations problems.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. San-Wal Janitorial Ltd., 1994 CanLII 9918

Pamela Chapman

OLRB0 cases1994–2012

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 12, 1994

Registered Nurses and Activity Director at nursing home do not exercise managerial functions under the Act.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of employees at a nursing home.

The employer argued that Registered Nurses and the Activity Director should be excluded from the unit because they exercised managerial functions under section 1(3) of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board reviewed the duties of both positions, finding that the Registered Nurses' supervisory and reporting functions were professional rather than managerial, and that the Activity Director did not exercise effective control over employees or important aspects of the employer's business.

The Board concluded that neither position exercised managerial functions and issued a final certificate for the bargaining unit.

United Steelworkers of America v. 681356 Ontario Limited c.o.b. as Foyer Sarsfield Nursing Home, 1994 CanLII 9896

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

Ken Petryshen

OLRB0 cases1986–2026

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 8, 1994

Applications for reconsideration and unfair labour practice dismissed as union organizer did not misrepresent membership evidence.

The employer applied for reconsideration of a decision certifying the union, and certain employees filed a section 91 application alleging that a union organizer made false representations and unduly influenced employees when collecting membership evidence.

The Board found the union organizer to be a credible witness and preferred his evidence over that of the employer's witnesses.

The Board concluded that the organizer did not misrepresent the certification process, the level of union support, or the consequences of a potential sale of the business.

The applications for reconsideration and under section 91 were dismissed.

IWA - Canada v. Madawaska Hardwood Flooring Inc., 1994 CanLII 9978

R. M. Sloan

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

M. Kaye Joachim

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 28, 1994

Board determines employee status of seventeen university staff members, excluding seven as managerial.

The applicant trade union applied under section 106(2) of the Labour Relations Act for a determination of whether numerous persons were 'employees' within the meaning of the Act.

The parties resolved the status of most individuals, leaving seventeen persons in dispute.

The Board assessed whether these individuals exercised managerial functions or were employed in a confidential capacity in matters relating to labour relations.

The Board concluded that seven of the disputed persons exercised managerial functions and were excluded from the Act, while the remaining ten were employees within the meaning of the Act.

One Board Member dissented, finding that all seventeen should be excluded.

York University Staff Association v. York University, 1994 CanLII 9814

W. J. Hayter

14 cases1981–2000

Wayne Manley

Wallace Kenny

8 cases1984–2016

Simon Mortimer

8 cases1993–2016

R. W. Kitchen

6 cases1982–1994

Robin McArthur

5 cases1991–2000

Robert McKay

17 cases1984–2001

Roberta Johnson

R. Kelly

Martin K. Denyes

2 cases1993–1993

Jerry Kovacs

James Hayes

66 cases1980–2000

Harold F. Caley

51 cases1980–2003

Grainne McGrath

25 cases1993–2022

Gord F. Luborsky

Edward Jenner

Douglas J. Wray

69 cases1980–2001

Donald Chiasson

2 cases1986–1993

Denis Ellickson

16 cases1992–2016

Cynthia Watson

8 cases1993–2015

Clifford J. Hart

14 cases1992–2013

Chris Lloyd

Not Practising Law66 cases1981–2021

Carl Peterson

53 cases1984–2023

B. S. Fishbein

2 cases1983–1993

Brian Shell

Blame Donais

4 cases1993–1994

A. M. Minsky

94 cases1980–2001

A. D. G. Purdy

6 cases1981–1996

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 17, 1993

G. O. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1994

Steelworkers declared interim exclusive bargaining agent pending resolution of over 200 successor rights applications.

The applicant union sought an interim order declaring it the successor union and exclusive bargaining agent for employees in over 200 pending successor rights applications.

The applications arose from a massive inter-union dispute following the purported merger of various Ontario locals of the RWDSU with the Steelworkers, which was contested by the RWDSU International and the UFCW.

The dispute caused widespread confusion and collective bargaining paralysis, prompting employers and the Minister of Labour to seek clarification on which union to deal with.

The Board granted the interim order, declaring the Steelworkers as the interim exclusive bargaining agent to preserve orderly labour relations and allow the collective bargaining process to function until the main applications are resolved.

Retail, Wholesale Canada, Canadian Service Sector Division of the United Steelworkers of America v. Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union District Council of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, 1993 CanLII 7873

M. Patrick Moran

36 cases1982–2011

J. Raso

19 cases1992–2001

Louisa M. Davie

OLRB0 cases1988–1996

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 16, 1993

Board declares employer violated collective agreement by misassigning work but declines to award damages.

The applicant trade union referred a grievance to the Board under section 126 of the Labour Relations Act, seeking damages for the employer's misassignment of work to another union.

The Board had previously ruled in a jurisdictional dispute that the work should have been assigned to the applicant.

The employer argued that Article 8.6 of the collective agreement precluded the Board from awarding damages for a first misassignment of work.

The Board agreed, finding that the collective agreement language prohibited the hearings panel from awarding damages unless specific exceptions applied, which were not met in this case.

The Board declared that the employer violated the collective agreement but awarded no damages.

Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, Local 473 v. The Electrical Power Systems Construction Association, 1993 CanLII 7867

John W. Woon

18 cases1983–2012

W. H. Wightman

OLRB0 cases1981–1996

R. 0. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–1999

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 13, 1993

Interim reinstatement granted for two employees discharged during a union organizing campaign.

The union applied for interim relief seeking the provisional reinstatement of two employees who were discharged during a union organizing campaign.

The union alleged the discharges were unfair labour practices intended to chill the campaign.

The employer claimed the discharges were for poor performance and theft.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the interim order, finding that the union established an arguable case and that the potential harm to the organizing campaign and other employees' rights outweighed any harm to the employer from temporarily reinstating the employees pending a full hearing.

United Steelworkers of America v. Tate Andale Canada Inc., 1993 CanLII 7913

R. M. Sloan

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

Louisa M. Davie

OLRB0 cases1988–1996

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 4, 1993

Employer and director found jointly and severally liable for anti-union layoffs during organizing campaign.

The applicant union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging that the employer and its director laid off several employees because of their union activity during an organizing campaign.

The Board found the director's testimony regarding the reasons for the layoffs to be contradictory and not credible.

The Board concluded that the layoffs were motivated by anti-union animus, violating sections 65, 67, and 71 of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board also found the director personally liable as he was the controlling mind of the company and acted on its behalf.

The respondents were ordered jointly and severally to pay $24,797.00 in damages for the lost wages of the laid-off employees.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen, Local 5 v. Classic Masonry Inc., 1993 CanLII 7845

Yvon Begin

Ray Werry

4 cases1993–2000

Keith Berry

Jamie Wyllie

W. H. Wightman

OLRB0 cases1981–1996

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 22, 1993

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRB0 cases1986–1999

Board declines to inquire into reprisal complaint where applicant attempted to resile from settlement agreement.

The applicant filed a reprisal complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement agreement to reinstate the applicant and refer the matter to arbitration.

The applicant subsequently changed his mind and sought to proceed before the Board.

The responding employer brought a motion requesting the Board decline to inquire into the complaint based on the settlement.

The Board granted the motion, finding no good reason to permit the applicant to resile from the freely entered settlement agreement, and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.

Chris Walker v. Steep Rock Resources Inc., 1993 CanLII 7884

N. L. Jesin

70 cases1987–2001

J. Burt

F. Maranno

Carol Oster

W. H. Wightman

OLRB0 cases1981–1996

H. Peacock