Inge M. Stamp

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

W. Gibson

Inge M. Stamp

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 9, 1990

Related employer application dismissed as unionized subcontractor and non-union general contractor operated in different markets.

The applicant union applied under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act for a declaration that the respondents, Century Store Fixtures Ltd., Century Interiors Ltd., and Jasper Construction Inc., be treated as one employer.

The union argued that Century, a unionized interior contractor, engaged in general contracting when its carpenters worked on Jasper's sites under Jasper's direction.

The Board found that Century and Jasper operated in different markets and were not engaged in associated or related activities.

The Board concluded there was no erosion of bargaining rights, as the carpenters were covered by the collective agreement at all times, and dismissed the application.

Local 27, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Century Store Fixtures Ltd., 1990 CanLII 5746

P. Kuhn

Mike Failes

4 cases1990–2000

L. A. Richmond

78 cases1983–2001

B. Suppa

5 cases1988–1999

W. N. Fraser

OLRB0 cases1988–2000

Inge M. Stamp

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 22, 1990

Construction of a retirement home with extensive services and administrative control falls within the ICI sector.

The applicant union referred a grievance alleging non-compliance with the collective agreement and requested a determination under section 150 of the Labour Relations Act as to whether the construction of a retirement home fell within the industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sector or the residential sector.

The Board examined the end use and work characteristics of the facility, noting the degree of control exercised by the administrator over the residents and the provision of services akin to an institution rather than a traditional residence.

The Board concluded that the construction of the retirement home fell within the ICI sector.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 1036 v. Future Care Limited and Kuco Construction Limited, 1990 CanLII 5845

Mark Contini

25 cases1981–2023

Elizabeth Mitchell

39 cases1988–2007

Inge M. Stamp

D. A. MacDonald

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 9, 1990

Employer acted unreasonably in refusing to hire hiring hall referrals based on prior uncommunicated rehire ban.

The union grieved the employer's refusal to hire two rodmen referred from the hiring hall.

The employer had discharged the grievors four years earlier for reporting to work under the influence of alcohol and maintained it was not obligated to rehire them.

The Board found that the employer acted unreasonably in refusing to hire the grievors, as they were not advised at the time of their 1985 discharges that they were ineligible for future rehire.

The grievance was allowed, with the Board remaining seized of damages.

International Association of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron-Workers Local Union 786 v. Stone & Webster Canada Limited, 1990 CanLII 5747

Peter L Waldmann

Carl Peterson

53 cases1984–2023

Inge M. Stamp

D. A. MacDonald

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 27, 1990

Related employer application dismissed; no evidence of scheme to erode bargaining rights.

The applicant union sought a related employer declaration under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act against two companies, one performing general contracting and the other building specialized water storage tanks.

The respondents conceded they were under common control and direction but argued the Board should decline to exercise its discretion.

The Board found no evidence of an erosion of the union's bargaining rights or a scheme to transfer work from the unionized entity to the non-unionized entity.

The parallel operations existed for bona fide business reasons prior to the union acquiring bargaining rights.

The application and related grievances were dismissed.

International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers, Local 721 v. Landmark Contracting Ltd., 1990 CanLII 5810

Walter Thornton

47 cases1986–2001

R. W Pirrie

OLRB0 cases1985–1998

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 23, 1990

Union certification granted; enforcing a sub-contract clause does not constitute intimidation or coercion.

The applicant union applied for certification in the construction industry.

The respondent employer alleged that the union's membership evidence was obtained through intimidation or coercion, in violation of section 70 of the Labour Relations Act, because a union representative told an employee he would be removed from the site if he did not sign a union card.

The Board found that the union representative was merely explaining the consequences of enforcing a sub-contract clause in the general contractor's collective agreement.

The Board concluded there was no improper conduct, accepted the membership evidence, and issued the certificates.

Carpenters & Allied Workers Local 27 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Cuneo Interiors, 1990 CanLII 5821

R. Hill

Peter K. Hrastovec

2 cases1990–2013

Donald S. MacKenzie

A. I. Ahee

W. N. Fraser

OLRB0 cases1988–2000

Inge M. Stamp

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 18, 1990

Board refuses to enforce 1% per day compounded penalty clause for late benefit contributions, finding it unconscionable.

The applicant union filed a grievance under section 124 of the Labour Relations Act seeking to enforce a collective agreement clause imposing a 1% per day compounded penalty on late benefit contributions.

The respondent employer paid the principal amount of $137,507.50 after the first day of hearing, leaving a penalty claim of $35,361.85 for 23 days of delay.

The Board held that the clause was penal and unconscionable, as the effective annual interest rate exceeded 3000% and was disproportionate to any actual damages suffered by the benefit funds.

The Board declined to enforce the penalty clause and instead awarded interest on the late payment at the chartered banks' prime rate.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 894 v. Commercial Contracting Corporation of Canada, Limited, 1990 CanLII 5790

Stephen A. McArthur

21 cases1988–2015

Bernard Fishbein

79 cases1982–2011

J. Redshaw

OLRB0 cases1986–1997

Inge M. Stamp

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 4, 1990

Board refused to allow employer to resile from agreed employee list and granted union certification.

The applicant union applied for certification in the construction industry.

The respondent employer attempted to resile from an earlier agreement regarding the list of employees in the bargaining unit on the application date.

The Board refused to allow the respondent to resile from its agreement, citing the need for finality in certification proceedings.

The Board also determined that one challenged individual was acting as a site superintendent and was therefore excluded from the bargaining unit.

As the union had sufficient membership support, the Board issued certificates for the industrial, commercial and institutional sector and all other sectors in the appropriate geographic area.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Beaverbrook Estates Inc., 1990 CanLII 5714

Jules Bloch

5 cases1987–1990

Brian D. Muironey

1 case1989–1989

W. Gibson

I. Redshaw

OLRB0 cases1988–1993

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 25, 1989

Union may apply for certification in a single geographic board area despite employees working elsewhere.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit in the construction industry encompassing the ICI sector province-wide and Board Area #26 for all other sectors.

The respondent employer argued that because it had employees working in Board Area #6 on the application date, the unit should also include Board Area #6, and that the Board should consider community of interest criteria under section 6(1) of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board ruled that under section 144(1) of the Act, a trade union is not required to apply for more than one geographic area even if employees are working in multiple areas.

The Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit accordingly and authorized a Labour Relations Officer to inquire into the list of employees.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council v. Beling Cement Construction Limited, 1989 CanLII 3057

S. B. D. Wahl

154 cases1980–2001

Peter J. Thorup

27 cases1981–2014

W. A. Correll

OLRB0 cases1986–1995

P. V. Grasso

OLRB0 cases1983–1997

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 19, 1989

Jurisdictional dispute dismissed on non-suit motion as union failed to establish prima facie case.

The complainant union (IAM) filed a jurisdictional dispute regarding the assignment of maintenance work on 16 systems at the employer's mill to the respondent union (IBEW).

The IAM argued that the work, which involved electronic instrumentation, fell within its jurisdiction due to technological changes from pneumatic and hydraulic systems.

After the IAM completed its case, the IBEW brought a motion for non-suit.

The Board reviewed the evidence and the collective agreements, finding that the IAM's agreement covered pneumatic, hydraulic, and fluidic instrumentation, while the IBEW's agreement covered electronic instrumentation.

The Board concluded that the IAM failed to establish a prima facie case that the work was improperly assigned, granted the non-suit motion, and dismissed the complaint.

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Lodge 771 v. Boise Cascade Canada Ltd., 1989 CanLII 3475

K. R. Valin

9 cases1983–1996

W. Gibson

J. Redshaw

OLRB0 cases1986–1997

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 1, 1989

Board grants certification, finding furnace shutdown and repair work constitutes construction rather than maintenance.

The applicant union applied for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent employer argued that the employees were engaged in maintenance work, not construction work, during a major shutdown at a smelter plant.

The Board found that the work, which involved demolishing and replacing refractory brick and piping to restore a furnace that had ceased to operate, constituted repair and new construction rather than routine maintenance.

Consequently, the Board determined that the work was construction work and the respondent was an employer in the construction industry.

The Board issued certificates to the applicant for the industrial, commercial, and institutional sector and all other sectors in the geographic area.

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union 800 v. Briecan Const. Limited, 1989 CanLII 3476

Stephen A. McArthur

21 cases1988–2015

Bernard Fishbein

79 cases1982–2011

W. Gibson

Inge M. Stamp

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 11, 1989

Union not required to include multiple geographic areas outside ICI sector in construction certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification in the construction industry for a bargaining unit comprising the ICI sector province-wide and Board Area 8 for all other sectors.

The respondent employer argued that 5 employees working in Board Area 18 should be included in the bargaining unit.

The Board held that under section 144(1) of the Labour Relations Act, a union is not required to apply for more than one geographic area outside the ICI sector.

The Board excluded the Board Area 18 employees and appointed a Labour Relations Officer to inquire into the status of three other individuals.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Beaverbrook Estates Inc., 1989 CanLII 3122

S. B. D. Wahl

154 cases1980–2001

Robin B. Cumine

23 cases1981–2015

N. L. Jesin

70 cases1987–2001

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Inge M. Stamp

D. A. MacDonald

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 29, 1988

Board lacks jurisdiction over work assignment dispute where collective agreement requires reference to external tribunal.

The complainant employer filed a jurisdictional dispute under section 91 of the Labour Relations Act regarding a work assignment to the Ironworkers, which was grieved by the Millwrights.

The respondents argued the Board lacked jurisdiction under section 91(14) because the collective agreements required such disputes to be referred to the Impartial Jurisdictional Disputes Board (the Plan).

The dispute had been referred to the Plan, but the Plan declined to make a determination because the work was already completed.

The Board held that the Plan's application of its time limits did not mean it failed to entertain the dispute.

Because the collective agreements provided for a mutually selected tribunal that was functioning, section 91(14) deprived the Board of jurisdiction.

The complaint was dismissed.

Copper Cliff Mechanical Contractors Ltd. v. The Millwright District Council of Ontario et al., 1988 CanLII 3666

W. Gibson

Inge M. Stamp

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 27, 1988

Board refused to interrupt Labour Relations Officer inquiry to hear viva voce evidence on credibility.

During a Labour Relations Officer's inquiry into the list and composition of a bargaining unit, the parties requested an adjournment to schedule a Board hearing for viva voce evidence regarding a serious credibility issue.

The Board declined to interrupt the inquiry, noting that credibility issues can typically be resolved by scrutinizing the verbatim transcript of the Officer's proceedings and hearing subsequent oral submissions.

The Board directed the Officer to continue the examination and the parties to adduce all evidence, including on credibility, before the Officer.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 105 v. Dunmark Electric (Ancaster) Limited, 1988 CanLII 3698

Ian S. Campbell

19 cases1985–2012

Bernard Fishbein

79 cases1982–2011

W. N. Fraser

OLRB0 cases1988–2000

Inge M. Stamp

H. Kobryn