J. Knight

The grievor requested to proceed with a grievance referral under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, after the matter had been adjourned sine die and resolved by Minutes of Settlement.

The Board held that the grievor had no standing to request the matter proceed, as the grievor was not a party to the collective agreement or the grievance referral.

Furthermore, the matter had been fully resolved by the settlement, which the grievor had signed.

The matter was withdrawn.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent construction labourers employed by the responding party in the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton and the United Counties of Prescott and Russell, excluding the ICI sector.

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 directed that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding party violated the collective agreement by subcontracting work to non-union employers.

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 declared that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement, found a violation, issued a cease and desist order, and directed the payment of the applicant's filing fee.

The applicant referred a matter to the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On agreement of the parties, the Board adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The Board noted the responding party's failure to file a Notice of Intent to Defend and directed that if the matter is relisted, the responding party must file the notice within five days or the Board may proceed without it.

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

The responding party asserted there were no employees at work in the proposed bargaining unit on the application date and gave notice under section 8.1.

The Board held that section 8.1 does not apply to construction industry certification applications.

Finding that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed unit were members of the union, the Board defined the appropriate bargaining unit and ordered a representation vote, with ballots to be segregated and the ballot box sealed due to a dispute over the employer's identity.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that the responding employer discharged two employees without just cause, including one as a reprisal for pursuing a WSIB claim.

The responding employer failed to file a response or pay the filing fee within the prescribed time limits.

Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the employer was deemed to have accepted all facts alleged in the application.

The Board found the employer liable for violating the collective agreement, ordered the immediate reinstatement of the employees, and scheduled a hearing to assess damages.

The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer hired non-union workers to perform bargaining unit work.

The responding party failed to file a response or 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 and ordered it to pay $16,865.13 in damages.

The issue of costs was scheduled for a separate hearing.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement to resolve the grievance.

The Board issued a consent order declaring that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement and had violated it.

The Board ordered the responding party to pay $64,013.59 in damages for unpaid benefit contributions and late payment penalties, in accordance with the agreed instalment schedule.

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

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit.

Accordingly, the Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees in the voting constituency.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding party employer failed to remit benefit trust fund contributions.

The responding party failed to file a response or 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 $12,308.11 in damages and penalties, plus $214.00 in costs.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer failed to pay contributions and file remittances as required by the collective agreement.

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 declared the employer violated the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $75,037.30 in unpaid contributions and liquidated damages, plus $214.00 in costs.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding employer failed to pay contributions and file remittances.

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 cancelled the scheduled hearing, declared the employer bound by the collective agreement, and ordered it to pay $94,406.59 in unpaid contributions and liquidated damages, plus costs.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding employer failed to pay required benefits under the applicable collective agreements.

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

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

The Board found the employer violated the collective agreements and ordered it to pay $3,892.92 in unpaid benefits and $214.00 in costs.

The applicant brought an application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On agreement of the parties, the Board consented to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

If neither party requests to proceed within that time, the application will be deemed terminated.

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

The responding party disagreed with the proposed bargaining unit, arguing for an "all employee" unit rather than the traditional craft unit of journeymen and registered apprentices.

The Board rejected the responding party's position, finding the craft unit appropriate under section 158(1) of the Act.

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

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

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

The applicant union and responding employers agreed to adjourn the grievance 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 no party requested to proceed.

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

The Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the applications will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer improperly laid off seven Toronto-based employees out of seniority order, arguing that less senior employees working in Sudbury (International territory) should have been laid off first.

The employer maintained that the northern employees were outside Local 50's jurisdiction and therefore not subject to bumping by Toronto members.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the collective agreement's seniority and layoff provisions must be read in conjunction with its jurisdictional clauses.

The Board concluded that Local 50's jurisdiction and the associated employment preferences do not extend into International territory, meaning Toronto members could not exercise seniority to bump northern employees.

The applicant, Millwright Regional Council of Ontario, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Northfield Industrial Contractors.

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