Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 9, 2000

Duty of fair representation complaint dismissed without a hearing as pleadings disclosed no prima facie breach.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against her union under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act.

She alleged the union failed to raise certain hours of work issues during an arbitration that resulted in her conditional reinstatement on a last chance basis following a termination for excessive absenteeism.

The Board dismissed the application without a hearing, finding that the union had pursued a grievance on her behalf and that the pleadings did not disclose conduct amounting to a prima facie breach of section 74.

Barbara Horn v. United Steelworkers of America and its Local 260, 2000 CanLII 12013

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 9, 2000

Board directed applicant to file submissions responding to union's request to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the responding trade union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The applicant sought $3,047.26 as his share of a grievance settlement.

The trade union asserted that the applicant was not covered by the grievance and requested that the application be dismissed without a hearing pursuant to Rule 46, arguing no prima facie case was established.

The Board directed the applicant to provide submissions in response to the trade union's assertions before determining how to proceed.

Henri Mayer v. I.W.A. Canada, Local 2693, 2000 CanLII 12428

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 8, 2000

Parties directed to bring all relevant documents to the hearing for the panel to determine production.

The applicant employer requested the production of documents from the responding party employee.

The employee submitted that some documents did not exist and requested documents from the employer.

The Board directed the parties to bring all relevant documents, including the employee's income tax returns, to the scheduled hearing.

The panel hearing the matter will determine relevance and production if the parties cannot agree beforehand.

B.G. Arnold Services Ltd. v. Wendell Hunte and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 13304

Hearing adjourned at the request of the applicant.

The applicant requested an adjournment of the hearing.

No one appeared for the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the adjournment and rescheduled the hearing for February 22, 2000.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 494 v. Scaffold Connection Corporation, 2000 CanLII 6777

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 7, 2000

Parties directed to meet with Labour Relations Officer to resolve document production issues.

The applicant requested the production of documents.

The parties were unable to agree on the remaining documents and the method of making them available.

The Board directed the parties to meet with a Labour Relations Officer prior to the hearings to assist with producing the relevant documentation pursuant to section 1(5) of the Act.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Lake Ontario District Council v. Lardale Construction, 2000 CanLII 13484

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 7, 2000

Appeal of rescinded health and safety order found timely; applicant directed to provide particulars.

The applicant appealed an order made by a Ministry of Labour inspector under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which rescinded earlier orders.

The responding party raised preliminary issues regarding timeliness and lack of particulars.

The Board found the appeal was timely as the applicant's letter clearly stated an intention to appeal.

The Board directed the applicant to provide the requested particulars and added the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board as a party.

United Steelworkers of America v. Goodyear Canada Inc., 2000 CanLII 1259

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 7, 2000

Board requests submissions on jurisdiction to extend time for filing an untimely employment standards appeal.

The applicant employer filed an application for review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The application appeared to be untimely, having been filed more than four years after the Order to Pay was issued.

The employer provided correspondence indicating previous requests to stay the proceeding or extend the time for filing.

The Board directed the parties to make submissions on whether the Board or the Director of Employment Standards has jurisdiction to extend the time for filing the application in these circumstances.

Mipps Systems Solutions Inc. v. Valerie Vautour and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 13197

Rick Lediard

2 cases2000–2000

Michael Horan

38 cases1980–2001

David Watson

22 cases1982–2010

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 2, 2000

Board adds responding parties and directs production of documents to be addressed at next hearing.

The applicant union requested to add Richard H. Gay Holdings Ltd. and Jarigay Investments Limited as responding parties and to amend its production request to include documents relating to these entities.

The Board granted the request to add the responding parties and directed the Registrar to reprocess the Notices to Employees.

Regarding the production of documents pursuant to s. 1(5) of the Labour Relations Act, the Board directed the responding parties to bring all arguably relevant documents in their possession or control to the next scheduled hearing date, where the parties could make submissions on any outstanding production issues.

International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen v. Gay Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 12509

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 2, 2000

Board directs second representation vote in union certification application following parties' agreement.

The applicant union filed an application for certification and an unfair labour practice complaint under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking a second representation vote under section 11.

The parties met with a Labour Relations Officer and reached an agreement on all issues in dispute, including the conditions for a second vote.

Pursuant to the agreement and section 11 of the Act, the Board directed a second representation vote for the agreed-upon bargaining unit and eligible voters.

The Board also ordered the posting of a Notice to Employees outlining their rights under the Act.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353 v. Elco-Tech Inc., 2000 CanLII 13581

Inge M. Stamp

Board amends previous decision to correct a typographical error.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued an amendment to its decision dated January 24, 2000, correcting a typographical error by replacing the word 'province' with 'provide' in paragraph 1(iii).

Cotton Blooms Garments Ltd. v. Bethsada St. Amaie, 2000 CanLII 10865

Inge M. Stamp

Extension of time to file application for review granted due to provision of incorrect forms.

The applicant employer filed an application for review under the Employment Standards Act.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 68(4) of the Act to extend the deadline for filing the application to December 13, 1999, noting that the applicant had been provided with incorrect forms which necessitated refiling.

1145914 Ontario Limited operating as Cango Gas Bar v. Kevin Branch and Owen Branch and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 12717

Inge M. Stamp

Board decision amended to correct typographical error in settlement amount from $3,000 to $1,000.

The applicant requested an amendment to a previous Board decision that incorrectly recorded a settlement amount.

The minutes of settlement stated the responding party was to pay $1,000.00, but the decision incorrectly showed $3,000.00.

The Board amended the decision to reflect the correct amount of $1,000.00.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation, Local 675 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Dimax Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 13159

Inge M. Stamp

Application for review terminated after applicant failed to respond to Board's direction regarding untimely filing.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision.

The Board advised the applicant that the application was untimely and directed him to provide reasons for an extension.

The applicant failed to respond.

The Board terminated the matter.

Jay Latvalla v. United Driver Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 12002

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 2000

Appeal withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw the appeal.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the appeal based on correspondence dated January 21, 2000.

Yval Gelinas v. Falconbridge Ltd., 2000 CanLII 5022

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 2000

Applicant granted 20 days to resubmit ESA review application after failing to receive correct forms.

The applicant filed an application for review under the Employment Standards Act but failed to use the correct forms.

The applicant advised the Board that it did not receive the documents previously sent by the Registrar.

The Board directed the Registrar to resend the correct application form, Rules of Procedure, and Information Bulletin.

The applicant was granted 20 working days to comply with the rules and resubmit the application, failing which the matter would remain terminated.

All Three West Indian Restaurant v. Deloris Small and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 12167

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board at the applicant's request.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application.

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

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 736 v. James Kemp Construction Limited, 2000 CanLII 9461

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Consent order issued for $54,163.07 in delinquent union dues and benefit remittances.

The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, concerning the employer's failure to pay union dues, welfare benefits, and pension remittances.

Prior to the scheduled hearing, the parties reached a settlement wherein the employer admitted to the delinquency and agreed to damages totalling $54,163.07.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued consent orders and declarations in accordance with the parties' minutes of settlement.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 736 v. Columbus Plate Limited, 2000 CanLII 12830

Inge M. Stamp

Employer's application for review of Order to Pay deemed timely despite missing initial payment.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The required payment to the Director of Employment Standards appeared to have gone astray.

The applicant provided a copy of the original cheque and a replacement cheque.

The Board found the application timely and directed it to be processed in the usual manner.

979072 Ontario Inc. A/O Aurora Microsystems v. Jim Fawcett and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 13319

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

A. Haward

Board directs representation vote in construction industry certification application, finding section 8.1 inapplicable.

The applicant union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party employer asserted there were no employees at work in the proposed bargaining unit on the application date and gave notice under section 8.1.

The Board held that section 8.1 does not apply to construction applications.

Finding that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support based on the information provided, the Board directed a representation vote for the proposed non-ICI bargaining unit of construction labourers.

Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A. Local 183 v. Diamante Urban Corporation, 2000 CanLII 13187

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy