John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 11, 2000

Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw its applications.

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

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services) v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union, 2000 CanLII 10262

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.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.

Construction Workers Union Local 150 affiliated with the Christian Labour Association of Canada v. Stephens & Rankin Inc., 2000 CanLII 1181

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 10, 2000

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

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.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 586 v. C & M Electric Ltd., 2000 CanLII 10413

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 10, 2000

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada/BACU-Canada Local 2, Toronto/Barrie, Ontario v. B.M.R. Construction Services, 2000 CanLII 3732

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Employer ordered to pay $16,865.13 in damages for hiring non-union workers after failing to respond to grievance.

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.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Lacon Contracting Inc., 2000 CanLII 6124

John Morgan Lewis

Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for failure to pay amount into trust.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay issued under the Employment Standards Act.

The Director of Employment Standards advised the Board that the employer failed to pay the ordered amount into trust.

As section 68(7) of the Act mandates payment into trust as a precondition for a review, the Board dismissed the application.

Wilhelm Dreiser v. Linda Hummel et al and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 8996

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Representation vote ordered in construction industry certification application; section 8.1 notice held inapplicable.

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.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v. G. Mason Construction, 2000 CanLII 6910

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

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

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

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 736 v. Demitec Limited, 2000 CanLII 4041

John Morgan Lewis

Motion to dismiss related employer and sale of business application for lack of prima facie case denied.

The responding party, D.J. Nash Construction and Maintenance Inc., requested that the Board dismiss the applicant's section 69 and 1(4) application without a hearing under Rule 46 for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

Alternatively, it requested an order under Rule 38 directing the applicant to file a detailed statement of material facts.

The Board dismissed both requests, finding the application contained sufficient material facts to require a response, and granted an extension of time for the responding party to file its response.

The Millwright Regional Council of Ontario, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America on behalf of Affiliated Local Unions 1007; 1151; 1244; 1410; 1425; 1592; 1916 and 2309 v. Eram Steel Contracting Inc., NC Fabrication Limited and D.J. Nash Construction and Maintenance Inc., 2000 CanLII 2800

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Application adjourned sine die on agreement of the parties.

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.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 700 v. Earlscourt Metal Industries Ltd., 2000 CanLII 11256

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Employer deemed to accept grievance facts after failing to file response; reinstatement ordered.

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.

Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 30 v. Cordeiro Roofing Ltd., 2000 CanLII 2826

John Morgan Lewis

J. G. Knight

G. McMenemy

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

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

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

Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada/Bacu-Canada Local 2, Toronto/Barrie, Ontario v. Blanford Construction Services (Chris Blanford c.o.b. as), 2000 CanLII 3003

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 5, 2000

Consent order issued requiring the responding party to pay $64,013.59 for unpaid benefit contributions.

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.

Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 30 v. E.E.S. Systems Ltd., 2000 CanLII 10438

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 5, 2000

Representation vote directed in construction industry certification application.

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.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Construction Council of Ontario v. Montana Electric Inc., 2000 CanLII 8964

John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 5, 2000

Interim order issued returning principal funds held in trust following settlement; hearing required for administrative fee.

The applicant sought review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

Following a settlement of a related human rights complaint, the applicant withdrew its application and requested the return of funds held in trust.

The claimant consented.

The Ministry of Labour did not oppose the return of the principal amount but argued the Board lacked jurisdiction to refund the administrative fee without a hearing.

The Board issued an interim order returning the principal amount of $7,989.60 and gave the applicant 15 days to request a hearing regarding the administrative fee.

University of Guelph v. Smiderle, 2000 CanLII 10887

John Morgan Lewis

Appeal of health and safety inspector's order dismissed as untimely because it was filed beyond the strict 30-day statutory limit.

The applicant appealed an inspector's order under section 61(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The order was made on August 28, 2000, but the appeal was not filed in writing until after the 30-day statutory time limit expired on September 27, 2000.

The applicant argued the appeal should be accepted because the order was delivered a day late, verbal notice was given on the deadline, and there were difficulties obtaining the proper form.

The Board dismissed the appeal, holding that the 30-day period commences from the date the order is made, verbal appeals are not permitted, and the Board has no statutory authority to extend the time limit.

National Grocers Cash & Carry v. Store Employees (Non-Unionized) and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 4983

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Employer ordered to pay $12,308.11 in unpaid benefit contributions and penalties in default judgment.

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.

Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 30 v. Atlantic HVAC Systems Ltd., 2000 CanLII 5021

John Morgan Lewis

Application for review of Order to Pay terminated after applicant's cheque bounced and directions ignored.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The cheque used to pay the required amount was returned for insufficient funds.

The Board directed the applicant to file proof of payment and request an extension of time.

The applicant failed to comply with the direction, and the Board terminated the application.

Units Inc. v. Harnek Singh and Parminder Singh, 2000 CanLII 6602

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

G. McMenemy

Employer ordered to pay $94,406.59 in unpaid contributions and damages following failure to respond to grievance.

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.

Universal Workers Union, L.I.U.N.A., Local 183 v. Metropolitan Paving & Concrete Inc., 2000 CanLII 3264

John Morgan Lewis