J. A. Ronson

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

Board directs representation vote in timely application to terminate union 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 bargaining rights of the responding party union.

The union failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

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 union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Christine Barnett v. Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), 2001 CanLII 16484

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

Representation vote directed in application for certification despite dispute over bargaining unit composition.

The Christian Labour Association of Canada applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at York Central Hospital.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and proposed a different bargaining unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to obtain a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with ballots of individuals in disputed positions to be segregated.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. York Central Hospital, 2001 CanLII 18919

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 12, 2001

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

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Algoma District Health Unit, 2001 CanLII 14900

Colin B. Johnston

2 cases2001–2001

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2001

Applicant directed to serve application on responding party's counsel.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the applicant to serve the responding party with a copy of the application via fax or courier to the responding party's counsel.

The responding party was granted ten days from receipt to file a response.

Daniel R. Crosmas v. Communication, Energy and Paperworkers Union – Local 1999, 2001 CanLII 8870

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 2001

Union decertified after majority of employees vote in opposition during representation vote.

The applicant applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of Euro-Can Manufacturing Inc.

Bruce Scott v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union – Local 175 – A.F.L. – C.I.O. – C.L.C., 2001 CanLII 13945

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Representation vote ordered in certification application; majority declines to seal ballot box despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had sufficient membership support to order a representation vote.

The responding party disputed the bargaining unit estimate and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The majority of the Board found the numerical difference insignificant and ordered a representation vote without sealing the ballot box.

The dissenting Board member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

Service Employees International Union Local 210 v. Epps Products/1054548 Ontario Inc., 2001 CanLII 18774

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Board directs representation vote for proposed bargaining unit of hospital service employees.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of service employees at the responding party hospital.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had established sufficient membership support (not less than 40%) in its proposed bargaining unit to warrant a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the voting constituency, with disputed positions casting segregated ballots.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Brockville General Hospital, 2001 CanLII 18883

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Applications withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

The applicant, Ontario Nurses' Association, requested to withdraw its applications against Lady Minto Hospital.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the applications were withdrawn.

Ontario Nurses’ Association v. Lady Minto Hospital, 2001 CanLII 2556

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Board refuses to order removal of applicant's appointed scrutinizer for representation vote.

The responding party requested that the Board order the removal of the scrutinizer appointed by the applicant for a representation vote.

The Board declined the request, noting that the vote is conducted under the auspices of a Board officer who oversees the procedure, and therefore the Board will not interfere with the applicant's choice of scrutinizer.

Efigenia Figueiredo et al. v. International Association of Machinist and Aerospace Workers, 2001 CanLII 5556

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Representation vote directed in application for termination of bargaining rights.

The applicants applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

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

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Belan v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175, 2001 CanLII 18657

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

J. A. Ronson

Brian McLean

OLRB0 cases1998–2012

Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw two applications against the Toronto Transit Commission.

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

Frank DeFazio v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2001 CanLII 14807

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

Alex Nazareth v. Teamsters International Union Local 938, 2001 CanLII 18882

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant, Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 53, sought to withdraw its application against the Corporation of the Town of Whitby.

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

Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 53 v. Corporation of the Town of Whitby, 2001 CanLII 10046

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board upon request by the applicant union.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application.

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

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. Walfoods Limited, 2001 CanLII 4027

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Board directed that two related applications be scheduled for hearing on the same day.

The applicant union requested that its unfair labour practice complaint under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 be scheduled for hearing with another Board file.

The responding party opposed the request.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and referred the matter to the Registrar to schedule the applications to be heard on the same day, leaving the hearing panel to determine how best to proceed.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Enbridge Commercial Services Thorold Call Centre, 2001 CanLII 8197

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Union decertified after majority of employees voted in opposition during representation vote.

The applicant applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party trade union.

Ian Tuck v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Local 3054, 2001 CanLII 16258

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Union certification granted following a successful representation vote.

The United Steelworkers of America applied for certification as the bargaining agent for employees of Stellarc Precision Bar Inc. Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a certificate to the applicant.

United Steelworkers of America v. Stellarc Precision Bar Inc., 2001 CanLII 4687

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Representation vote directed and ballot box sealed in application to terminate bargaining rights.

The applicants applied 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 at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed a representation vote but ordered the ballot box sealed due to the responding party's allegations, including claims under section 63(16) of the Act.

Figueiredo et al. v. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, 2001 CanLII 3118

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock