J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 23, 2000

Representation vote ordered in displacement application, but ballot box sealed pending hearing on court injunction.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor union.

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

The intervenor requested that the application be dismissed or the vote delayed due to a Superior Court injunction against former intervenor officials now with the applicant.

The Board ordered the vote to proceed but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending a hearing to determine the effect of the court order.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Meadow Park Nursing Home, 2000 CanLII 12023

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 23, 2000

Request for reconsideration dismissed as premature pending outcome of Court of Appeal decision.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Board decision that dismissed its applications as untimely.

The applicant argued that a pending appeal to the Court of Appeal could ultimately reinstate an interest arbitration award, making the applications timely.

The Board dismissed the request as an attempt to relitigate without new evidence, noting that the theoretical concerns had not yet transpired.

The Board clarified that a future reconsideration request would be entertained if the Court of Appeal decision altered the circumstances, provided it is filed in a timely manner after that decision.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. St. Andrew’s Residence, 2000 CanLII 12323

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 16, 2000

Brian McLean

OLRB0 cases1998–2026

Style of cause amended to reflect the correct name of the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision correcting an error in paragraph 1 of its previous decision dated February 25, 2000.

The style of cause was amended to reflect the correct name of the responding party as 'Highrise Window Technologies Inc.'.

United Brotherhood of Retail Food, Industrial and Service Trades International Union v. Highrise Window Technologies Inc., 2000 CanLII 6829

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 16, 2000

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 and the application was withdrawn.

United Steelworkers of America v. Kafko Manufacturing Limited, 2000 CanLII 8925

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 16, 2000

Representation vote directed in termination application; union's request to seal ballots due to employer initiation allegations denied.

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

The union sought to dismiss the application without a vote or to seal the ballot box, alleging employer initiation under subsection 63(16) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found the application timely and the allegations insufficient to prevent the vote or seal the ballots at this stage.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held, with the union's allegations to be dealt with in the ordinary course at a hearing.

David Weisenberg et al. v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America et al., 2000 CanLII 9032

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

Representation vote ordered in displacement certification application, with ballot box sealed pending hearing on injunction.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor union at Delhi Nursing Home.

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

The Board ordered a representation vote.

The intervenor argued that a recent Superior Court injunction against individuals formerly associated with the intervenor prevented the vote or required the ballot box to be sealed.

The Board ordered the vote to proceed but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending a hearing to consider the intervenor's arguments regarding the court order.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Delhi Nursing Home, 2000 CanLII 11833

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicants sought to withdraw their application against the responding party union.

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

Kevin Good et al. v. The United Steelworkers of America, Local 9042, 2000 CanLII 1343

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

Representation vote directed in union certification application using the responding party's bargaining unit description.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party filed a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, disputing the bargaining unit description but not the number of employees.

The Board found no substantive difference between the proposed units and directed a representation vote using the responding party's description.

The Board determined that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed unit were members of the union and ordered the vote to proceed.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Trailmobile Parts & Service Canada Ltd., 2000 CanLII 7488

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Christopher J. Albertyn

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 and the application was withdrawn.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 175 & 633 v. Hallmark Housekeeping Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 3689

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 13, 2000

Brian McLean

OLRB0 cases1998–2026

Representation vote directed in union certification application.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least 40% of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board directed a representation vote to be held, with any disputes regarding the inclusion of certain employees or the employer's legal identity to be determined following the vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. London Health Sciences Centre c.o.b. as Growing Concern Co-operative Daycare Centre, 2000 CanLII 1927

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 13, 2000

Brian McLean

OLRB0 cases1998–2026

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure majority support 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.

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 applications by the applicant for the same bargaining unit.

Teamsters Local Union 938 v. Toys ‘R’ Us (Canada) Ltd., 2000 CanLII 6234

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Anthony Brown

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 10, 2000

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

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

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

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support for a representation vote and that the numerical difference between the parties' estimates was not significant.

The Board ordered a representation vote.

A dissenting member would have directed the ballot box to be sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

Teamsters Local Union 938 v. The Fitness Institute, 2000 CanLII 4744

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

Anthony Brown

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 10, 2000

Representation vote ordered in displacement application, but ballot box sealed pending hearing on intervenor's allegations.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification for employees currently represented by the intervenor.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had the requisite 40% membership support to order a representation vote.

The intervenor raised unfair labour practice allegations and cited a Superior Court injunction, arguing against the vote or requesting the ballot box be sealed.

The Board ordered the representation vote to proceed but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending a hearing on the intervenor's submissions.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Provincial Nursing Home Ltd., 2000 CanLII 11100

Jeffrey M. Andrew

11 cases1994–2010

C. J. Abbass

37 cases1980–2001

A. P Tarasuk

17 cases1984–2000

Marilyn Silverman

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 9, 2000

Trade union ordered to proceed first in argument when hearing resumes.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a procedural direction regarding the order of proceedings.

The Board ordered that the applicant trade union shall proceed first in argument when the hearing resumes.

United Steelworkers of America v. Pitts Donut Limited, 2000 CanLII 9698

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Anthony Brown

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 8, 2000

Board declared amalgamation a sale of business and ordered a representation vote for intermingled employees.

The applicant union applied under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, following the amalgamation of Northern Credit Union Limited and Valley Savings (Renfrew County) Credit Union Inc. The Board declared the amalgamation constituted a sale of business.

As the amalgamation resulted in an intermingling of employees represented by the applicant and the responding party union, the parties agreed to a representation vote.

The Board directed a representation vote to determine the successor bargaining agent for the agreed voting constituency.

Office & Professional Employees International Union Local 26 v. Northern Credit Union Limited, 2000 CanLII 12791

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 7, 2000

Bram Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–2026

Application withdrawn by 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.

Teamsters Local Union No. 847 v. Goodwill Industries of Toronto, 2000 CanLII 7554

J. A. Rundle

H. Peacock

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 6, 2000

Bram Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–2026

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.

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

A one-year bar on subsequent applications by the applicant was imposed.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2000 CanLII 7252

J. A. Rundle

D. A. Patterson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 3, 2000

Bram Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–2026

Board directs representation vote in union certification application and orders ballot box sealed.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than 40% of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed a representation vote to be taken and ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to the responding party's section 8.1 notice.

Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers International Union, Local 264 v. Peek Frean Division of Christie Brown & Company, 2000 CanLII 6442

Timothy W. Sargeant

OLRB0 cases1997–2001

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle