Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

Application for review terminated following written Minutes of Settlement between the parties.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The parties entered into written Minutes of Settlement with the assistance of a Labour Relations Officer.

As the settlement disposed of all issues in dispute, the Board terminated the application in accordance with subsection 69.1(5) of the Act.

Daria Carinci v. News Marketing Canada, 2001 CanLII 6125

Inge M. Stamp

G. Pickell

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

Union's request to withdraw certification applications granted without imposing a statutory bar on future applications.

The applicant union sought to withdraw five applications for certification the day before scheduled representation votes.

Due to an administrative error by the Board, the votes proceeded anyway.

The responding party employer requested that the Board impose a bar on future applications pursuant to sections 7(8) and 7(9) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging a late withdrawal and manipulation of Board procedures.

The Board declined to impose a bar, finding that the withdrawal request was not late and the disruption was caused by the Board's inadvertence, not the applicant's manipulation.

The applications were withdrawn with leave of the Board.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Construction Council of Ontario v. Konecranes Canada Inc. o/a Crane Pro Services, 2001 CanLII 14401

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

Application for review of Order to Pay terminated following parties' Minutes of Settlement.

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

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing to disburse the funds held in trust by the Director.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds disbursed in accordance with the settlement and terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

T.B.T. Windows and Doors Extrusion Inc. v. Faris Jona, 2001 CanLII 17009

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2001

Application for review withdrawn with leave; trust funds disbursed equally by agreement.

The applicant sought to withdraw an application for review under the Employment Standards Act.

The responding party consented and requested that the monies held in trust be disbursed equally between the parties.

The Board granted leave to withdraw the application and directed the disbursement of funds as agreed.

Caroline Engelmann Gottheil v. Mr. Douglas Kropp, 2001 CanLII 16741

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2001

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, Local 1819 v. Regal Aluminum (1993) Inc., 2001 CanLII 18652

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2001

Application for review dismissed for failure to pay the required amount in trust.

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

The applicant failed to pay the required amount to the Director in trust or provide an irrevocable letter of credit within the statutory time limit.

The Board dismissed the application for review for failure to comply with section 68(7) of the Act.

Brian Light v. Timbuktu Restaurants Inc., 2001 CanLII 12209

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 10, 2001

Employer ordered to pay damages for late benefit remittances after failing to respond to grievance referral.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer paid fringe benefit remittances late.

The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend.

Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the responding party was deemed to have accepted all facts stated in the application.

The Board found the employer violated the collective agreement, cancelled the scheduled hearing, and ordered the employer to pay late payment damages and costs.

The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 666 v. Medcon Mechanical Ltd., 2001 CanLII 3271

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 10, 2001

Application adjourned sine die for up to one year due to applicant's failure to respond.

The applicant failed to advise the Board by the specified deadline whether the matter was to proceed to a hearing, as directed in a previous decision.

Consequently, the Board adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

If no party requests to proceed within that time, the application will be deemed terminated.

Allied Construction Employees Local 1030 v. Osler Paving & Construction Ltd., 2001 CanLII 6393

Inge M. Stamp

G. Pickell

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 7, 2001

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party employer.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 586 v. Crawford & Murray Electric Limited, 2001 CanLII 20276

Inge M. Stamp

G. Pickell

A. Haward

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 7, 2001

Grievance referral adjourned on consent of the parties.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On the agreement of the parties, the Board adjourned the matter and referred it to the Registrar to be rescheduled for four days of hearing.

Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local No. 47 v. Cro-Mex Plomberie & Chauffage Ltee, 2001 CanLII 19407

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Board orders pre-hearing production of documents in related employer and sale of a business application.

The applicant union sought pre-hearing production of documents in a related employer and sale of a business application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties agreed to adjourn a related certification application pending the disposition of this matter.

The Board ordered the responding parties to produce or make available the requested documents, or to list any documents they object to producing along with the basis for their objection.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 494 v. Trojan Interior Contracting Limited, 2001 CanLII 7280

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

Application adjourned sine die for up to one year on consent of the parties.

The applicant union filed an application with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On consent of the parties, the Board amended the style of cause to reflect the correct name of the responding party and adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The application will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed within that time.

Allied Construction Employees, Local 1030 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. National Homes (Management) Inc., 2001 CanLII 16313

Inge M. Stamp

Reprisal complaint dismissed without a hearing for failing to establish a prima facie case.

The applicant filed a complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, alleging that his supervisor refused to allow him to visit the First Aid station for an injury sustained at home, and that he was escorted out of the plant after refusing to continue working.

The responding party argued the application failed to establish a prima facie case.

The Board dismissed the application under Rule 46 of its Rules of Procedure, finding that even if all alleged facts were true, there was no assertion that the applicant was disciplined for acting in compliance with or seeking to enforce the Act.

Lou Neskovski v. General Motors of Canada Limited, 2001 CanLII 9149

Inge M. Stamp

Applicant directed to respond to union's preliminary objections regarding delay and lack of particulars.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The union raised preliminary objections, arguing the application should be dismissed due to a 10-month delay and a failure to provide particulars.

The Board directed the applicant to respond to the union's allegations and facts by a specified date, failing which the Board would determine the matter based on the materials filed and deem the applicant to have accepted the union's facts.

Grantley Howell v. United Steelworkers of America, Local 7135, 2001 CanLII 7557

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 5, 2001

Board directs representation vote in construction industry certification application despite employer's claim of having no employees.

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

The responding party claimed it had no employees and used subcontractors.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of at least forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be held.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers' International Union of North America Local 183 v. Vinegrove Homes, 2001 CanLII 4505

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 31, 2001

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party employer.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Ontario Power Generation Inc., 2001 CanLII 13089

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 29, 2001

Certificates issued to trade union following successful representation vote.

Following a representation vote where more than 50 per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant trade union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued certificates to the applicant.

The certificates cover journeymen and apprentice electricians in the employ of the responding party in the industrial, commercial and institutional sector across Ontario, and in all other sectors in specified geographic areas.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 353 v. Lancor Electric (1996) Ltd., 2001 CanLII 18581

Inge M. Stamp

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 29, 2001

Appeal of inspector's order dismissed as untimely; Board lacks discretion to extend 30-day limit.

The applicant filed an appeal of an inspector's order under the Occupational Health and Safety Act beyond the 30-day time limit and requested an extension.

The Ministry of Labour did not oppose the extension, but the union argued the Board lacked discretion to extend the time limit.

The Board held that section 61(1) of the Act is clear and there is no statutory provision or Board rule permitting an extension of time for appealing an inspector's order.

The appeal and the request for suspension of the order were dismissed as untimely.

Liquor Control Board of Ontario v. Carpenter, 2001 CanLII 16234

J. G. Knight

Inge M. Stamp

G. McMenemy