J. Knight

The applicant requested document production from the responding parties.

The Board directed both responding parties to produce the documents in their possession to the applicant's counsel by June 1, 2000, with leave for the applicant to renew its request for further documents by June 12, 2000.

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 is an affiliated bargaining agent and that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

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 is a trade union and an affiliated bargaining agent.

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 defined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

The applicant, Christian Labour Association of Canada, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Elta Gas Services Ltd. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

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 will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed.

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

The responding party failed to file a response.

The 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 individuals in the voting constituency.

The applicant union requested that documents ordered to be produced by the responding parties be made available for inspection at a more convenient location than Saint George de Beauce.

The Board directed the responding parties to make the documents available for inspection at either their Ottawa office or the Board's office in Toronto.

The applicant requested an adjournment of the matter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and adjourned the matter sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

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

Following a prior decision finding the responding parties bound by the collective agreement and liable for its violation, this hearing was scheduled to assess damages.

The responding parties failed to appear.

The Board ordered the responding parties to pay $48,944.75 in unpaid remittances and $749.00 in fees.

In a referral of a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board heard three preliminary motions.

The Board denied the Carpenters' request for intervenor status, finding no benefit to their participation as their position aligned with the responding party's.

The Board also dismissed the responding party's motions to adjourn the matter pending the outcome of other grievances and to order the applicant to provide further particulars, concluding that the grievances lacked factual overlap and sufficient particulars had already been provided.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a consent direction extending the time for the responding party to file a response to August 14, 2000.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a procedural direction on consent, ordering the responding party to file its response by April 11, 2000.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.

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

The applicant filed a grievance referral against the responding party.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board terminated the application.

The applicant filed a grievance against the responding party.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board terminated the application.

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 a result, 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.

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

The Board recognized the applicant as a trade union, noting a recent authorized name change.

Finding that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union, the Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision correcting an error in its previous decision dated April 3, 2000.

The Board revoked and replaced paragraphs 6 and 7 of the previous decision to accurately define the appropriate bargaining unit and the voting constituency for a representation vote involving carpenters and carpenters' apprentices in the employ of the responding party.

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

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

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

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit for carpenters and carpenters' apprentices and directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant union filed a construction industry grievance alleging that the responding employer violated the collective agreement by failing to assign labourers to tend carpenters on scaffolding jobs.

The Board found that the employer had failed to assign at least one labourer to all scaffolding jobs, contrary to a previous jurisdictional dispute decision, and thus breached the collective agreement.

However, the Board declined to award damages, finding that the employer had not acted arbitrarily and that the correct work assignment only became clear after the previous decision was issued.