Inge M. Stamp

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 24, 2001

Union certified to represent construction labourers after winning representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent construction labourers employed by the responding party.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the responding party conceded that the remaining segregated ballots would not affect the outcome.

The Board issued certificates to the union for the industrial, commercial and institutional sector and all other sectors in the appropriate geographic areas pursuant to section 160(1) of the Act.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 493 v. 1017457 Ontario Inc., 2001 CanLII 15767

Margo MacKinnon

13 cases2000–2020

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 24, 2001

Appeal of health and safety order conditionally terminated after Ministry rescinded the underlying order.

The applicant appealed an occupational health and safety order issued by a Ministry of Labour inspector.

Prior to the hearing, the Ministry advised the Board that the underlying order had been rescinded and requested that the appeal be vacated as moot.

The Board directed that if no party filed written objections within seven days, the appeal would be deemed terminated without further notice.

Armbro Construction Ltd. v. Labourers Local 527 Ottawa, 2001 CanLII 5371

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 23, 2001

Board corrected an administrative error to schedule a grievance arbitration hearing within the statutory 14-day period.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board issued a decision to correct an administrative error in the notice of hearing, which had inadvertently set a hearing date beyond the statutory 14-day requirement.

The Board cancelled the original May 4, 2001 date and rescheduled the hearing to April 26, 2001.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Hydro One Inc., 2001 CanLII 16348

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 23, 2001

Representation vote directed in application for termination of bargaining rights.

The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party's bargaining rights.

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

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Warrington Kelvin v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183, 2001 CanLII 4261

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 23, 2001

Request for default decision on grievance referral denied due to insufficient specificity in the applicant's pleadings.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and requested a default decision without a hearing because the responding party failed to file a response.

The Board declined to determine the referral based solely on the materials filed, finding that the applicant's pleadings lacked sufficient specificity regarding the alleged collective agreement violations, legal costs, and the claim for a $25,000 penalty.

The Board directed that these issues be dealt with at the scheduled hearing.

International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local 95 v. 1067615 Ontario Inc. and/or 1335664 Ontario Limited c.o.b. as J.P.L. Contracting, 2001 CanLII 5035

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 19, 2001

Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for failure to pay amount in trust.

The applicant employer sought a review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The applicant failed to pay the ordered amount to the Director of Employment Standards in trust, as required by section 68(7) of the Act.

Consequently, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application for review.

Spectrum Carpet Dyeing & Cleaning Co. v. Unnamed and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 17803

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 18, 2001

Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for failure to pay amount into trust.

The applicant employer sought a review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The Board dismissed the application because the applicant failed to pay the required amount into trust or provide an irrevocable letter of credit within the 45-day statutory time limit, rendering the application untimely.

Yasian Limited v. Hsuan Nung Lin and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 15507

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 18, 2001

Employment Standards Act application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw her application under the Employment Standards Act.

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

Tara McCullough v. Conceptual Technologies, 2001 CanLII 3210

Inge M. Stamp

Employer's application for review of an Order to Pay deemed timely under the 45-day statutory deadline.

The employer filed an application for review of an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay.

The Officer had incorrectly stated that the deadline for appeal was 30 days from the date of the order.

The Board noted that under section 68(3)(a) of the Employment Standards Act, the deadline is 45 days.

As the employer filed the application and paid the required monies into trust within the 45-day period, the application was deemed timely and referred for processing.

Mercuri Landscape Contractors Inc. v. Antonio Pugliese, 2001 CanLII 21114

Inge M. Stamp

Application to suspend inspector's orders regarding conservation officer radio communications pending appeal dismissed.

The applicant Ministry applied under s. 61(7) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act to suspend the operation of an inspector's orders pending an appeal.

The orders required the Ministry to provide dedicated police radio communication dispatch service to conservation officers and to prepare a written manual of enforcement policy and procedures.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the Ministry failed to rebut the presumption that the inspector's orders were correct and failed to demonstrate that suspending the orders would not endanger the workers.

Ministry of Natural Resources v. Stephan Dubuc, 2001 CanLII 6394

Inge M. Stamp

Board directed a new representation vote based on the parties' Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant union filed an application for certification and an unfair labour practice complaint against the responding party employer.

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing to hold a new Board-supervised representation vote and to pay a specified sum to an employee.

The Board directed that a new representation vote be held in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement and listed the eligible voters.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675 v. 1317404 Ontario Limited, 2001 CanLII 14749

Inge M. Stamp

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

Board directed applicant to file submissions responding to requests for reconsideration within two weeks.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the applicant union to file submissions in response to requests for reconsideration and related issues raised by the responding parties within two weeks.

The responding parties were directed to file any reply submissions within two weeks after receiving the applicant's submissions.

The panel remained seized with respect to the request for reconsideration.

Carpenters and Allied Workers Local 27 v. Consolidated Concrete Forming Ltd., 2001 CanLII 19853

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Hearing adjourned with directions for the applicant to provide further particulars.

The applicant union sought an adjournment of a scheduled hearing and directions for the production of further particulars.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the hearing, directed the applicant to provide further particulars and documents, and allowed the responding parties three weeks to amend their response after receipt of the materials.

Construction Workers Local 53 v. Ellis General Contractors, 2001 CanLII 12596

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Application for termination of bargaining rights conditionally dismissed for failure to file Certificate of Delivery.

The applicant filed an application for termination of bargaining rights but failed to file a Certificate of Delivery (Form A-81) verifying delivery to the union and employer, as required by the Board's Rules of Procedure.

The Board held that it could not process the application without the certificate and ordered that the matter would be deemed terminated if the certificate was not received within five days.

Lino (Carmelino) Domanico v. IBEW Local 353, 2001 CanLII 20507

Inge M. Stamp

Application for certification dismissed due to failure to properly name and serve the correct employer.

The applicant union filed an application for certification naming Magnum Homes and/or West Star Construction Group Ltd. as the responding party.

Magnum Homes responded that it subcontracted the work to Westar Carpentry Ltd. The applicant attempted to add Westar Carpentry Ltd. as a responding party and submitted amended certificates of delivery, but failed to properly serve the correct documents within the required timeframe.

The Board dismissed the application as fundamentally flawed due to the lack of proper notice and service on the actual employer.

Allied Construction Employees Local 1030 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Magnum Homes and/or West Star Construction Group Ltd., 2001 CanLII 17485

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Board directs applicant union to provide further particulars of unfair labour practice allegations.

In the context of a displacement certification application and a related unfair labour practice complaint, the responding party union requested further particulars of the allegations made against it.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the applicant union to provide further particulars, including the names of the representatives alleged to have approached employees in the presence of management, as well as where and when the conduct occurred.

Labourers’ International Union of North America v. 870528 Ontario Ltd., o/a Lido Construction Co., 2001 CanLII 15681

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Pre-hearing production of documents ordered in related employer and sale of business application.

The applicant union requested pre-hearing production of documents in relation to a related employer and sale of business application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the responding parties to provide copies of, or access to, the relevant documents by a specified date prior to the scheduled hearing.

Any disputes regarding the production of specific documents were to be addressed at the hearing.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada v. 761203 Ontario Inc. c.o.b. as Schafer Masonry, 2001 CanLII 9070

Inge M. Stamp

Board directed parties to provide correspondence regarding disputed document production request.

The applicant requested the Board dismiss the responding party's request for production of documents.

The Board noted it did not have the responding party's request letter and directed the parties to provide the necessary correspondence if the issue remained outstanding.

Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 494, 2001 CanLII 12434

J. Pickell

OLRB0 cases2000–2001

Inge M. Stamp

A. Haward