J. A. Ronson

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 4, 2000

Caroline Rowan

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Representation vote directed in displacement application for union certification.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it had established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible employees to determine whether they wish to be represented by the applicant or the intervenor union.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. The Fort William Clinic, 2000 CanLII 10141

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 4, 2000

Caroline Rowan

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Union certification granted following successful representation vote and agreement on bargaining unit description.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with the parties agreeing on the bargaining unit description, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a final decision without a hearing.

A certificate was issued to the applicant.

Industrial, Wood & Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A. Canada) v. Sodexho Marriott Services Canada Ltd., 2000 CanLII 3888

Susan Ursel

44 cases1985–2024

Susan Jenkinson

Michael D. Failes

9 cases1994–2010

Maureen O'Halloran

3 cases1982–2000

Julie E. McAlpine

Claudia Skolnik

Christine Schmidt

Bonnie Coldham

Russell Goodfellow

OLRB0 cases1999–2001

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 23, 2000

Proposed bargaining unit of professional and technical employees found inappropriate due to lack of distinctiveness.

The applicant union applied for certification of a bargaining unit consisting of professional and technical employees at the Ontario College of Nurses of Ontario.

The employer argued that an 'all employee' unit was appropriate.

The Board found that the proposed unit lacked distinctiveness, both in its criteria for inclusion and within the employer's organizational structure, as it cut across various departments and operational groups without a clear objective demarcation.

Consequently, the Board concluded that the proposed unit was not appropriate and directed the parties to advise on how the application should be disposed of.

Office & Professional Employees’ International Union v. Ontario College of Nurses of Ontario, 2000 CanLII 7032

R. R. Montague

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 22, 2000

Request for reconsideration of certification vote dismissed for being filed beyond the 20-day time limit.

An employee filed correspondence with the Ontario Labour Relations Board, which the Board treated as a request for reconsideration of a prior decision directing a representation vote and dismissing a certification application.

The employee argued that the ballot should have included a non-union option and that the Board had improperly conferred trade union status on the intervenor.

The Board dismissed the request for reconsideration as it was filed beyond the 20-day time limit without good reason.

The Board also clarified that it had not made a finding of trade union status for the intervenor, and that a non-union option was not appropriate on the ballot because the intervenor claimed existing bargaining rights.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Iron Range Bus Lines Inc., 2000 CanLII 10658

Donna M. D’Andrea

8 cases2000–2017

R. R. Montague

Marilyn Silverman

OLRB0 cases2000–2001

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 21, 2000

Interim union certification granted for one of two responding employers following a representation vote.

The applicant union filed applications for certification and related employer declarations concerning two responding parties.

Following a representation vote, the ballots were segregated and sealed.

The parties subsequently agreed to count the ballots, which revealed majority support for the union among employees of Two Plus Seven Inc., but not Balmer Studios.

The Board granted an interim certificate for the employees of Two Plus Seven Inc., pending the continuation of the hearing on the related employer application.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada v. The Balmer Studios Inc., 2000 CanLII 6041

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 17, 2000

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2025

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 considered the request.

The Board granted leave for the withdrawal.

The application was formally withdrawn.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Smith Packaging Limited, 2000 CanLII 10644

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 16, 2000

Gail Misra

OLRB0 cases1994–2025

Request to limit witness production at Toronto hearing denied; responding party must utilize scheduled days.

The responding party in a union certification application sought to be relieved of its obligation to produce its witnesses at a hearing scheduled in Toronto, proposing to bring only one witness from Ottawa.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the request, noting its policy that the first two days of hearings for parties located more than a three-hour drive from Toronto must be held in Toronto.

As the responding party bore the onus, it was responsible for ensuring sufficient witnesses were present to make full use of the scheduled hearing days.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Ottawa Regional Hospital Linen Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 12069

Marilyn Silverman

OLRB0 cases2000–2001

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 14, 2000

Board ordered a representation vote following an agreed sale of a business and intermingling of employees.

The applicant filed an application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing that a sale of a business occurred from two predecessor employers to the applicant, and that there was an intermingling of employees.

Based on the agreement, the Board declared that a sale of a business and intermingling had occurred, defined the appropriate bargaining unit, and ordered a representation vote to determine if the responding party union would represent the employees.

New Path Youth and Family Counselling Services of Simcoe County v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union and its Local 355, 2000 CanLII 7476

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Bram Herlich

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 14, 2000

Unopposed successor rights application adjourned for further evidence of transfer and trade union status.

The applicant trade union applied for a declaration that it had acquired the bargaining rights of its predecessor, SEIU, with respect to employees of Kraft Canada Inc. Although the application was unopposed, the Board declined to grant the declaration on the basis of the materials filed.

The Board found the narrative description of the transfer too skeletal to conclude a transfer had occurred, and noted the applicant had never previously been found to be a trade union within the meaning of the Act.

The Board granted the applicant three weeks to file further submissions and documentary evidence.

Canadian Cereal Workers, CLC Local 101 v. Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Kraft Canada Inc., 2000 CanLII 8016

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Harry Freedman

OLRB0 cases1984–2001

Application for reconsideration of duty of fair representation complaint dismissed as arbitration permitted legal counsel.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Board decision dismissing his duty of fair representation complaint against the union.

The applicant alleged the union failed to object to the employer using legal counsel at an expedited arbitration hearing.

The Board found the arbitration was conducted under section 49 of the Labour Relations Act, which permits legal representation, not under the collective agreement's expedited process.

Finding no new evidence or arguments that would alter the original decision, the Board dismissed the application for reconsideration.

Asmond Tulloch v. United Steelworkers of America Local 3129, 2000 CanLII 10933

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Bram Herlich

Representation vote ordered in certification application; ballot box not sealed despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite 40% membership support in the proposed bargaining unit and ordered a representation vote.

Despite a dispute over the geographic scope and inclusion of certain positions, the Board directed that disputed individuals could cast segregated ballots.

The Board declined to seal the ballot box in response to the employer's section 8.1 notice, finding the numerical differences insignificant.

A dissenting Board member would have sealed the ballot box or delayed the vote until the section 8.1 issues were resolved.

Union of Needletrades, Industrial, and Textile Employees v. Mitchell Plastics Ltd., 2000 CanLII 8464

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Bram Herlich

Application for certification dismissed after union failed to win majority in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, its Territories and Canada, Local 58 v. Mayfield Suites Hotel Mississauga Limited Partnership cob as Stage West All-Suite Hotel & Theatre Restaurant, 2000 CanLII 9049

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Bram Herlich

Board directs representation vote in application for certification.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Chateau Gardens Parkhill a Division of Chateau Nursing Homes Inc., 2000 CanLII 7144

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Bram Herlich

Application for certification dismissed after union failed to win majority in representation vote.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

Following a representation vote where not more than 50 per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statement of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

A one-year bar on further certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit was imposed.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Samuel Metal Processing, Division of Samuel, Jon & Co., Limited, 2000 CanLII 6128

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote ordered in certification application despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that it appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The responding party filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, but agreed that the ballots should be counted.

A dissenting Board member argued that the vote should not take place or the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues were resolved at a hearing.

United Steelworkers of America v. Premdor Inc., 2000 CanLII 11058

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in union certification application.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible employees.

Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Hurley Corporation, 2000 CanLII 10444

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in certification application after union demonstrated requisite 40 percent membership support.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

I.W.A. Canada, Local 2693 Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada v. The Corporation of the Town of Longlac (Administrative Office), 2000 CanLII 8492

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Bram Herlich

Representation vote directed in certification application after finding applicant is a trade union.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board determined that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with voters choosing between the applicant and the intervenor union.

Service Employees International Union, Local 204 v. JAV Residences Ltd., 2000 CanLII 6834

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Bram Herlich