I. A. Ronson is a board member at the Ontario Labour Relations Board with 4 decisions on record from 1986 to 1996. Key areas include employment and labour law.

What tribunal does I. A. Ronson sit on?

I. A. Ronson sits on the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

What areas of law does I. A. Ronson decide?

I. A. Ronson's most common areas include Employment and Labour Law (4 decisions). I. A. Ronson has handled 4 decisions across 1 areas.

How many decisions has I. A. Ronson made?

I. A. Ronson has 4 decisions on record from 1986 to 1996.

Who frequently appears before I. A. Ronson?

Representatives who frequently appear before I. A. Ronson include Darlene Van Volkenburg, Don McLean, Heather Hamilton.

I. A. Ronson — Board Member

OLRBFeb 20, 1996

Employer's application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as union had not slept on its rights.

The applicant employer applied under section 65(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to terminate the responding party union's bargaining rights.

The union brought a motion to dismiss the application for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board found that the union had not slept on its rights and was making efforts to bargain, despite unsmooth negotiations.

Applying the principle that section 65(2) is to be used as a shield and not a sword, the Board granted the motion and dismissed the employer's application.

Erin Park Automotive Limited v. National Automobile, Aerospace Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), 1996 CanLII 11178

OLRBJan 25, 1989

Occupational health and safety reprisal complaint dismissed; suspension was for insubordination, not safety refusal.

The complainant, a prime coater operator, alleged he was suspended for exercising his right to refuse unsafe work under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The employer maintained the complainant was suspended for insubordination after refusing a direct order to clean a paint roller while the line was stopped, not for safety reasons.

The Board found the employer's witnesses more credible, concluding the complainant was ordered to do the work when the machine was down and that his refusal was not motivated by health and safety concerns.

The complaint was dismissed.

Mark Doucette v. Continuous Colour Coat Ltd., 1989 CanLII 3048

OLRBJan 22, 1988

Certification application dismissed due to improper and unreliable Form 9 declaration regarding membership evidence.

The applicant employee association applied for certification.

The intervener union challenged the application, alleging improprieties in the membership evidence and the Form 9 declaration, as well as employer interference.

The Board found that the Form 9 declarant did not make the necessary reasonable inquiries and that the amended Form 9 contained material misrepresentations regarding the collection of membership cards and fees.

Consequently, the Board rejected the Form 9 declarations as improper and unreliable.

Without a valid Form 9, the membership evidence was given no weight, and the application for certification was dismissed.

Pebra Peterborough Employees Association v. Pebra Peterborough Inc., 1988 CanLII 3643

OLRBFeb 12, 1986

Employer bound by voluntary recognition agreement; misunderstanding of terms did not amount to misrepresentation.

The applicant union filed a grievance under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act seeking remittances from the respondent employer.

The employer argued it was not bound by the collective agreement, alleging the union representative misrepresented the terms of a voluntary recognition agreement before it was signed.

The Board found no material misrepresentation, concluding the employer simply misunderstood the scope of the agreement.

The Board declared the employer bound by the Provincial Agreement and remained seized of the quantum of damages.

I. A. Ronson

Erin Park Automotive Limited v. National Automobile, Aerospace Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), 1996 CanLII 11178

Mark Doucette v. Continuous Colour Coat Ltd., 1989 CanLII 3048

Pebra Peterborough Employees Association v. Pebra Peterborough Inc., 1988 CanLII 3643

The Ontario Provincial Conference of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen v. Vincent Spirito & Sons Ltd., 1986 CanLII 1406

for the applicant

for the complainant

for the intervener

for the respondent

for the responding party

Decision types