J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Brian McLean

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure majority support in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the responding party's employees.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed within the required time.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local No. 880 v. 564163 Ontario Ltd. 2000 OLRB mini 1662

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Brian McLean

Representation vote directed for ambulance service employees in union certification application.

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

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 and that the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate.

Based on the membership evidence filed, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The employer filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Act disagreeing with the estimated number of employees, but agreed the ballots should be counted following the vote.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Alexandria & District Ambulance Service 2000 OLRB mini 1658

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1998–2026

Brian McLean

Board directs representation vote in certification application after employer fails to file response.

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

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

Finding that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of at least forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Alfred & District Ambulance Service 2000 OLRB mini 1657

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1998–2026

Brian McLean

Representation vote ordered in certification application as union demonstrated requisite 40 percent membership support.

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

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 and that at least 40 percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held.

Although the employer disagreed with the union's estimate of the number of employees and the proposed bargaining unit, the union had sufficient support even under the employer's estimate, so the ballot box was not ordered sealed.

Christian Labour Assn. of Canada v. Waltron Ltd. 2000 OLRB mini 1653

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Brian McLean

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure majority support in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for employees of the responding party.

A representation vote was held, and not more than 50% of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Blackadar Continuing Care Centre Inc. 2000 OLRB mini 1640

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 10, 2000

Union certified as bargaining agent following a successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of employees of the responding party.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no outstanding statements of desire to make representations, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the union.

A certificate was ordered to issue for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Valley and District Assn. for Community Living 2000 OLRB mini 1622

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 7, 2000

Board reconsiders certification decision to amend bargaining unit description as agreed by the parties.

The applicant union sought reconsideration of a certification decision to amend the bargaining unit description.

The Board reconsidered its previous decision and substituted the bargaining unit description agreed upon by the parties, which included a specific address and excluded the night auditor.

An amended certificate was ordered to be issued.

United Brotherhood of Retail, Food, Industrial and Service Trades International Union v. Quality Inn 2000 OLRB mini 1610

Patrick Kelly

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 7, 2000

Board reconsidered its decision to amend the bargaining unit description to reflect the parties' agreement.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The Board issued a certificate on March 31, 2000, but the bargaining unit description did not accurately reflect the agreement of the parties.

The Board reconsidered its decision and amended the bargaining unit description to include the specific address and exclude the night auditor, as agreed by the parties.

An amended certificate was ordered to be issued.

United Brotherhood of Retail, Food, Industrial and Service Trades International Union v. Quality Inn 2000 OLRB mini 1609

Mr. Wray

2 cases1991–2000

Laura Trachuk

OLRB0 cases1993–2001

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 7, 2000

Board declines to halt ballot counting in certification votes despite pending contempt motion.

The CAW applied for certification to represent employees at numerous healthcare and service employers, displacing the incumbent SEIU.

The Board ordered representation votes.

The SEIU requested that the Board halt the proceedings and not count the ballots because it had a contempt motion before the Court alleging impropriety in the CAW's access to employees during the organizing campaign.

The Board dismissed the request, noting its exclusive jurisdiction over certification and its focus on employees' wishes during the open period.

The Board directed that the ballots be counted.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. South Huron Hospital 2000 OLRB mini 1606

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Representation vote directed in union certification application after employer failed to file a response.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union at the time the application was made.

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

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 v. Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 844 2000 OLRB mini 1577

Timothy W. Sargeant

J. A. Ronson

H. Peacock

Board directs representation vote in timely application for termination of union's bargaining rights.

The applicant employee applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party union's bargaining rights.

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

Finding the application timely and that at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the union, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

Tough v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union 2000 OLRB mini 1572

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

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.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 87-M Southern Ontario Newspaper Guild v. Brabant Newspapers, A Division of Southam Inc., Flamborough Review Inc. 2000 OLRB mini 1569

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

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

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 application would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union Local 87-M Southern Ontario Newspaper Guild v. Brabant Newspapers, A Division of Southam Inc. 2000 OLRB mini 1568

R. R. Montague

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1999–2019

Patrick Kelly

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 5, 2000

Union certification granted following a successful representation vote by employees.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at the responding party's workplace.

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 Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The Board also defined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the agreement of the parties.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Cyrville Chrysler Ltd. 2000 OLRB mini 1550

J. A. Ronson

D. A. Patterson

Brian McLean

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 5, 2000

Leave granted to withdraw applications following filing of Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant union sought leave to withdraw its applications against the responding parties.

Having regard to the Minutes of Settlement filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. Belpak Foods, A Division of Janes Family Foods 2000 OLRB mini 1548

R. R. Montague

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

Applicant union acquired bargaining rights after winning representation vote against incumbent union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Board declared that the United Steelworkers of America no longer represented the employees of Northern Credit Union Limited.

The applicant, Office & Professional Employees International Union Local 26, acquired the bargaining rights for the employees formerly represented by the incumbent union.

Office & Professional Employees International Union Local 26 v. Northern Credit Union Ltd. 2000 OLRB mini 1540

R. R. Montague

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1993–2001

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

Request to adjourn hearing pending a related civil court motion denied.

In a series of certification applications where the CAW sought to replace the SEIU as bargaining agent, the Board scheduled a hearing to address the effect of a related civil action and interim court order.

The SEIU requested an adjournment of the hearing because of a further motion it planned to present to the Court.

The Board declined to grant the adjournment in advance, directing that the adjournment request could be addressed by the parties at the scheduled hearing.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Delhi Nursing Home 2000 OLRB mini 1539

R. R. Montague

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1993–2001

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson

Board directs applicant to advise if it wishes to proceed with its application or face termination.

The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

A Labour Relations Officer attempted to contact the applicant to determine if it wished to proceed but was unsuccessful.

The Board directed the applicant to advise by a specified date whether it intended to proceed, failing which the application would be terminated.

I.W.A. Canada, Local 2693 v. McKenzie Forest Products Inc. 2000 OLRB mini 1532

R. R. Montague

OLRBUnanimous (Wrote the reasons)0 cases1993–2001

Laura Trachuk

J. A. Ronson