H. Peacock

M. M. Bouillon

G. Peppiatt

E. Gaudet

5 cases1991–2026

D. Nicholson

James A. Ronson

OLRB0 cases1980–1995

H. Peacock

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 14, 1991

Employer breached statutory freeze by failing to pay annual wage increase according to established pattern.

The complainant trade union alleged that the respondent employer violated the statutory freeze provisions of the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act and the Labour Relations Act by failing to pay an annual wage increase and a week-end premium, and that this conduct was improperly motivated.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the employer breached the freeze provisions by failing to pay the annual wage increase, as there was an established pattern of maintaining wages at a specific rate relative to the central collective agreement.

The Board dismissed the complaints regarding the week-end premium and improper motivation, finding no established pattern for the premium and no evidence of anti-union animus.

The employer was ordered to pay the wage increase retroactively with interest.

Ontario Nurses' Association v. George St. L. McCall Chronic Care Wing of the Queensway General Hospital, 1991 CanLII 6062

Paula Turtle

14 cases1987–2009

Lorne Firman

4 cases1988–2013

K. G. O'Neil

OLRB0 cases1988–1998

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 2, 1991

G. O. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1994

Union certified without a vote after voluntary counter-petitions reaffirmed majority support.

The applicant union applied for certification and submitted membership evidence for over 55% of the bargaining unit.

Objecting employees filed a petition opposing the union, and the union subsequently filed counter-petitions reaffirming support.

The Board found both the petition and counter-petitions to be voluntary.

Because the counter-petitions were the last voluntary statement of intention, the Board relied on them to establish the union's support level.

The Board declined to order a representation vote, finding no evidence of misrepresentation, intimidation, or undue influence by the union organizers.

A certificate was issued to the applicant.

United Steelworkers of America v. Minnova Inc., 1991 CanLII 6068

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

H. Peacock

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 4, 1991

Public Relations Secretary declared not an employee due to confidential labour relations duties.

The applicant union applied under section 106(2) of the Labour Relations Act for a determination of whether a Public Relations Secretary was an 'employee'.

The Board reviewed the Labour Relations Officer's report and the parties' written submissions.

The Board found that the individual was employed in a confidential capacity in matters relating to labour relations, as she was privy to significant information regarding grievances and collective bargaining.

Consequently, the Board declared she was not an 'employee' within the meaning of the Act.

C.U.P.E., Local 1582 v. Metropolitan Toronto Library Board, 1991 CanLII 6087

S. C. Bernardo

42 cases1980–2001

Rick Weiss

2 cases1991–1996

Len Budge

John Moszynski

71 cases1986–2017

Jim Thomson

4 cases1982–1991

Dwight Brown

Bertha Greenstein

4 cases1991–1992

W. H. Wightman

H. Peacock

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 4, 1991

Construction grievance deferred to allow filing of a jurisdictional dispute complaint over work assignment.

The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the respondent employer engaged non-union personnel to perform demolition work.

The intervener union argued the grievance was essentially a jurisdictional dispute and requested deferral.

The Board agreed that the issues raised constituted a jurisdictional dispute best dealt with under section 91 of the Act.

The Board adjourned the grievance for 21 days to allow the filing of a jurisdictional dispute complaint.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v. PCL Constructors Eastern Inc., 1991 CanLII 6089

E. L. Stringer

8 cases1982–1997

Craig Flood

74 cases1988–2024

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 26, 1991

Brain Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–1999

Certification applications dismissed where union requested withdrawal after meeting with Labour Relations Officer.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its certification applications after meetings with a Labour Relations Officer had commenced and after the respondent employer raised 'non-pay' allegations regarding the union's membership evidence.

The employer argued the applications should be dismissed and the non-pay allegations adjudicated.

The Board declined to adjudicate the non-pay allegations in the context of a withdrawn application.

However, interpreting its Practice Note No. 7 in light of recent procedural changes, the Board held that a request to withdraw made after a Labour Relations Officer has met with the parties should result in the dismissal of the applications.

The applications were accordingly dismissed.

Textile Processors, Service Trades, Health Care, Professional and Technical Employees International Union, Local 351 v. Sheraton Parkway Hotel, 1991 CanLII 6122

W. H. Wightman

S. A. Tacon

OLRB0 cases1984–1991

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 21, 1991

Complaint alleging union breached secret ballot and fair representation requirements during ratification vote dismissed.

The complainant alleged that the union breached sections 72(4) and 68 of the Labour Relations Act during a ratification vote.

The complainant argued that a show of hands to endorse the bargaining committee's recommendation violated the requirement for a secret ballot vote.

The Board found that a secret ballot vote was properly conducted and that the show of hands merely concluded the discussion without affecting the secret ballot.

The Board also found no evidence of arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith conduct by the union.

The complaint was dismissed.

Branimir Katkic v. CAW Local 1285, 1991 CanLII 6108

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 23, 1991

The OLRB has jurisdiction to hear statutory freeze complaints under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act.

The complainant trade union alleged that the respondent hospital employer violated the statutory freeze provisions of the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act (HLDAA) and the Labour Relations Act (LRA).

The respondent raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the Board lacked jurisdiction and that the matter should be determined by an interest board of arbitration constituted under the HLDAA.

The Board dismissed the objection, finding that the Legislature intended for the Board to hear and determine unfair labour practice complaints, including allegations of wrongfully altered working conditions, in the hospital sector.

The proceeding was ordered to continue.

Ontario Nurses' Association v. George St. L. McCall Chronic Care Wing of the Queensway General Hospital, 1991 CanLII 6029

L. N. Gottheil

24 cases1986–2012

J. Liberman

6 cases1987–2000

S. A. Tacon

OLRB0 cases1984–1991

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 9, 1991

Temporary agency workers found to be employees of the respondent for certification purposes based on overriding control.

The union applied for certification of a bargaining unit of the respondent's employees.

The parties disputed whether four temporary agency workers were employees of the respondent for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act.

Applying the criteria from K Mart Canada Limited, the Board found that the respondent exercised overriding control over the workers, including directing their duties, bearing the ultimate burden of their remuneration, and controlling discipline and discharge.

The Board concluded the four persons were employees of the respondent and included them in the bargaining unit for the purposes of the count.

The Board also directed a hearing to determine the voluntariness of a petition filed by employee objectors.

National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada v. Nichirin Inc., 1991 CanLII 6036

Michael Gottheil

24 cases1986–2003

Lynda A. Coulter

Jonathan Eaton

4 cases1991–1991

Brando Paris

20 cases1985–2001

K. G. O'Neil

OLRB0 cases1988–1998

I. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1989–1997

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 7, 1991

Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as decertification petition was not voluntary.

The applicant, a leadhand, applied to terminate the union's bargaining rights and circulated a petition in support.

The Board inquired into the voluntariness of the petition.

The Board found that the applicant's position as a leadhand with power to effectively recommend discipline, combined with his family relationship to the plant manager, would cause reasonable employees to perceive him as closely aligned with management.

Consequently, the Board was not satisfied that the petition represented a voluntary expression of employee wishes.

The application was dismissed.

Peter Sourtzis v. United Steelworkers of America, 1991 CanLII 6024

William Franco

R. Hutcheson

Neal Sommer

4 cases1990–2012

L. Moore

In Private Practice8 cases1990–1997

L. C. Arnold

38 cases1980–1992

Harry Freedman

Bruno Iannacito

3 cases1990–2001

Bruce Stewart

4 cases1982–1995

Barry Bernardo

W. H. Wightman

S. A. Tacon

OLRB0 cases1984–1991

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 20, 1990

Union's expulsion of managerial inspectors for performing bargaining unit work during a strike did not violate the Act.

The Toronto Transit Commission filed an unfair labour practice complaint against the union after the union expelled several inspectors from membership.

During a strike, the TTC had directed the inspectors, who were excluded from the bargaining unit as managerial personnel, to perform bargaining unit work.

The union passed a resolution revoking the local membership of any inspector who complied, which resulted in the loss of their departmental seniority rights upon return to the bargaining unit.

The Board dismissed the complaint, finding that the strike provisions of the Labour Relations Act (sections 74, 76, and 78) apply only to 'employees' and not to managerial persons.

The Board further held that section 70 does not protect managerial persons seeking to enforce seniority rights under a collective agreement.

Toronto Transit Commission v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113, 1990 CanLII 5638

Vello Medin

Robert J. Atkinson

18 cases1986–2014

R. O. MacDowell

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 26, 1990

G. O. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1994

Grievance dismissed; discharge upheld for short-term construction worker who refused work assignment.

The grievor, a truck driver with two weeks of service at the site, was discharged after refusing to repair a damaged truck tire and inviting his foreman to fire him.

The union grieved the discharge, arguing the refusal was motivated by a health condition and that discharge was an excessive penalty.

The Board found the health concern was an ex-post-facto rationalization and that the true reason for the refusal was the grievor's belief that the work was unpleasant and should have been assigned to a junior employee.

The Board declined to substitute a lesser penalty, noting that progressive discipline is attenuated in the construction industry, particularly for short-term employees.

The grievance was dismissed.

Ontario Allied Trades Construction Council v. Electrical Power Systems Construction Association, 1990 CanLII 5627

R. C. Filion

29 cases1980–1996

Mike Failes

4 cases1990–2000

Michael McBride

Michael A. Church

51 cases1982–2026

Maureen Fitzgerald

Douglas J. Wray

69 cases1980–2001

R. O. MacDowell

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 26, 1990

Union certified without a vote after employer unlawfully discharged key organizer during organizing campaign.

The union applied for certification and filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging the employer unlawfully discharged a key union organizer and interfered with the organizing campaign.

The employer claimed the discharge and employee communications were due to a price war with competitors.

The Board found the employer's explanation for the discharge lacked credibility and concluded the employee was terminated for his trade union activity, violating the Labour Relations Act.

Finding that the employer's illegal conduct made it unlikely that the true wishes of the employees could be ascertained through a representation vote, the Board certified the union pursuant to section 8 of the Act and ordered the reinstatement of the discharged employee with compensation.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. David Chapman's Icecream Limited, 1990 CanLII 5740

L. Suzanne Balzer

L. A. MacLean

20 cases1980–1993

W. H. Wightman

Robert D. Howe

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 11, 1990

Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as petition was motivated by perceived employer financial reward.

The applicant sought to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights for a unit of fishing employees.

The Board found that the petition signed by the employees was not a voluntary expression of their true wishes, as they were motivated by a belief that the employer would financially reward them with increased fishing quotas if they decertified the union.

The application was dismissed.

Joao Pombinho v. Local 444 C.A.W., 1990 CanLII 5795

Steven F. Wilson

9 cases1990–2016

Lynda Toms

David Nicholson

3 cases1986–1991

Ken Petryshen

OLRB0 cases1986–2026

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 4, 1990

G. 0. Shamanski

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

Following a sale of business, parties must restart dispute resolution mechanisms including conciliation.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding whether a conciliation officer must be appointed following the sale of a hospital business.

The predecessor employer and the union had already completed conciliation and constituted an arbitration board under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act prior to the sale.

The Board advised the Minister that under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, the union's notice to bargain to the successor employer has the same effect as certification, entitling the parties to utilize all dispute resolution mechanisms anew.

Consequently, the previously constituted arbitration board has no jurisdiction over the successor employer, and the Minister is required to appoint a conciliation officer.

Corporation of the County of Simcoe (Trillium Manor Home for the Aged) v. Ontario Nurses' Association, 1990 CanLII 5803

R. Gary McLister

5 cases1986–2000

Lennox A. MacLean

3 cases1990–1993

Robert D. Howe

R. M. Sloan

OLRB0 cases1986–2000

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 8, 1990

Board directed filing of its previous determination with the Supreme Court for enforcement following non-compliance.

The complainant union notified the Board that the respondent employer failed to comply with a previous Board decision ordering the payment of $247,802.56.

The respondent argued that enforcement should be delayed pending a constitutional challenge at the Court of Appeal.

The Board noted that no stay of proceedings had been obtained and that the Court of Appeal had recently dismissed the respondent's appeal.

Finding that the respondent failed to comply with the determination, the Board directed that a copy of the decision be filed with the Supreme Court of Ontario for enforcement pursuant to section 89(6) of the Labour Relations Act.

Great Lakes Fishermen and Allied Workers' Union v. Saco Fisheries Limited, 1990 CanLII 5653

Wallace T. Gretton

Richard P. Stephenson

17 cases1990–2020

Paula Turtle

14 cases1987–2009

M. J. Gleason

2 cases1989–1990

Michael Gordon

40 cases1980–1991

K. Thompson

12 cases1990–2026

John C. Field

4 cases1990–1992

Harvey A. Beresford

10 cases1982–1997

Guy Giorno

6 cases1990–1995

G. S. Monteith

Not Practising Law66 cases1981–2021

Brian Shell

Brian P. Smeenk

34 cases1982–2012

W. H. Wightman

Robert D. Howe

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 1990

Board dismisses bias objection against panel member and rules comparative law expert evidence inadmissible.

During a hearing on a Charter challenge to section 12 of the Labour Relations Act, the respondents objected to a Board Member sitting on the panel due to comments he made in the Ontario Legislature 20 years prior.

The Board dismissed the bias objection, finding the comments did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The Board also ruled that expert evidence concerning the scope of freedom of association in other countries was inadmissible during the section 2(d) phase of the hearing, though the proposed expert was found qualified to testify on comparative European labour law in the section 1 phase.

Canadian Guards Association v. Pinkerton's of Canada Ltd., 1990 CanLII 5732

R. C. Filion

29 cases1980–1996

Daniel A. Harris

6 cases1985–1990

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

Robert D. Howe

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 30, 1989

Employer committed unfair labour practices during organizing drive, but section 8 certification denied.

The union applied for certification and filed unfair labour practice complaints against the employer, alleging interference during an organizing campaign.

The Board found that the employer violated sections 64, 66, and 70 of the Labour Relations Act by interrogating employees, discriminatorily prohibiting union solicitation, and transferring union organizers to isolate them.

However, the Board dismissed the application for certification under section 8, concluding that the employer's contraventions did not create a situation where the true wishes of the employees were unlikely to be ascertained.

The Board ordered remedial relief, including a cease and desist order, a posting, and the provision of an employee list to the union.

National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada, (CAW-Canada) v. Ontario Bus Industries Inc., 1989 CanLII 3021

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

H. Peacock

G. T. Surdykowski

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 22, 1989

Union certified without a hearing or vote after demonstrating requisite membership support in the construction industry.

The applicant trade union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for journeymen and apprentice painters employed by the respondent in the construction industry.

The respondent employer requested a hearing and a representation vote, arguing that certification would negatively impact its business and that employees were misled.

The Board denied the requests, noting that the size of the business and potential financial impact are irrelevant to certification, and the respondent failed to particularize its allegations of impropriety.

Finding that the applicant had demonstrated membership support of over fifty-five percent, the Board granted the application and issued certificates for both the industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sector province-wide and all other sectors in the relevant geographic area.

International Brotherhood of Painters & Allied Trades, Local 205 v. Westdale Painting & Decorating Ltd., 1989 CanLII 3000

Sean McGee

27 cases1988–2022

Mike McBride

1 case1989–1989

Linda Huebscher

6 cases1989–1992

John Raudoy

2 cases1989–1989

Jock Jardine

1 case1989–1989

Jacques A. Emond

13 cases1980–2005

Francois Dutrisac

1 case1989–1989

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

M. A. Nairn

OLRB0 cases1989–2001

H. Peacock