John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

A. Haward

Representation vote directed in displacement application for certification in the construction industry.

The applicant trade union filed a displacement 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 40 percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

Despite a dispute over the bargaining unit description and the number of employees, the Board directed a representation vote for the largest possible voting constituency, leaving the appropriateness of the unit to be determined after the vote.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Powertel Utilities Contractors Inc., 2001 CanLII 8997

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

A. Haward

Representation vote directed in displacement application for certification in the construction industry.

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

The incumbent union intervened.

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

The Board directed a representation vote to be held for the largest possible voting constituency, noting that the applicant's status as a trade union and the appropriateness of the bargaining unit would be determined at a subsequent hearing.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. Powerline Utility Contractors Inc., 2001 CanLII 16041

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

A. Haward

Representation vote ordered in displacement application for certification with ballot box sealed due to numerical dispute.

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

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

The Board found the proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate but noted a significant numerical difference between the parties' estimates.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, with the ballot box sealed until the parties agree or the Board orders otherwise.

Canadian Union of Skilled Workers v. K-Line Maintenance & Construction Ltd., 2001 CanLII 14120

John Morgan Lewis

J. Knight

A. Haward

Representation vote ordered 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 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 Act.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to obtain a representation vote.

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

Bricklayers, Masons Independent Union of Canada Local 1 v. Bayview-Wellington Construction Inc., 2001 CanLII 14169

John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 3, 2001

Application for review of order to pay terminated following parties' execution of Minutes of Settlement.

The employer applied for a review of an Employment Standards Officer's order to pay.

The employer and the employee subsequently entered into Minutes of Settlement to resolve the matter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $13,760 returned to the employer and $7,800 paid to the employee.

The application was terminated pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Employment Standards Act.

Con-Strada Construction Inc. v. Teresa D’Antonio and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 7976

John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 1, 2001

Representation vote directed in application to terminate union's bargaining rights.

The applicants 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 Board found the application timely and that not less than forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit had expressed a wish not to be represented by the union.

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

Carlos Ribeiro and Jose Oliveira v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, 2001 CanLII 5398

J. Paul Wearing

16 cases1984–2016

Jim Hogarth

1 case2001–2001

Graham Williamson

3 cases2001–2013

Garth Cochrane

1 case2001–2001

Cyril J. Abbass

4 cases1982–2001

A. M. Minsky

94 cases1980–2001

John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 26, 2001

Affiliated bargaining agent is a proper responding party in a termination application; delivery to it satisfies statutory requirements.

The applicant filed a termination application naming Local 46 as the responding party.

Local 46 and the Ontario Pipe Trades Council (OPTC) argued the application should be dismissed because the OPTC, as the employee bargaining agency, was the only proper responding party and the application was not delivered to it.

The Board held that an affiliated bargaining agent like Local 46 holds bargaining rights and is a proper responding party.

The Board found the applicant complied with the delivery requirements under section 63(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 and the Board's Rules by delivering the application to Local 46.

Jeff Jessup v. United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 46, 2001 CanLII 4189

John Morgan Lewis

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 20, 2001

Representation vote directed in termination application with ballots sealed pending resolution of prior application.

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

A previous termination application was pending and its representation vote ballots were sealed.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held for the current application without delay, citing the necessity of ordering timely votes, and ordered the ballots to be segregated and the ballot box sealed pending resolution of the outstanding issues.

Jeff Jessup v. Ontario Pipe Trades Council, 2001 CanLII 7036

John Morgan Lewis

Time extended for filing an application for review of an Order to Pay.

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

The application was filed beyond the statutory time limit.

The applicant requested an extension of time and provided submissions in support.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 68(4) of the Act to extend the time for filing, rendering the application timely, and referred the matter to the Registrar.

Ralph G. Tannis v. Ahmed "Rush" Rashid and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 20909

John Morgan Lewis

Application for certification withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application, directing the parties' attention to section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding any future applications.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Tabrco Management Ltd., 2001 CanLII 8859

John Morgan Lewis

Application for certification withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application and directed the parties to section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding any future applications.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Tempo Insulation & Drywall Ltd., 2001 CanLII 15945

John Morgan Lewis

Application for certification withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application and directed the parties' attention to section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding any future applications.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Eldom Drywall Ltd., 2001 CanLII 20214

John Morgan Lewis

Application for certification withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought leave to withdraw its application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application, directing the parties' attention to section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding any future applications.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Regency Drywall & Acoustics Inc., 2001 CanLII 14892

John Morgan Lewis

Application for certification withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application and directed the parties to section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding any future applications.

Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Marin Contracting Ltd., 2001 CanLII 13573

John Morgan Lewis

Board rescinds default judgment and issues consent order for $2,524.32 based on parties' settlement.

The applicant union filed a grievance referral against the responding employer.

The Board initially issued a default judgment.

Subsequently, the parties met with a Labour Relations Officer and executed Minutes of Settlement resolving all outstanding matters.

The Board reconsidered and rescinded its default judgment, and issued a consent order declaring the employer bound by the collective agreement, finding violations of the agreement, and ordering the employer to pay $2,524.32 in damages.

International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 721 v. C & T Reinforcing (1987) Ltd., 2001 CanLII 2857

John Morgan Lewis

Employment standards application terminated for failure to pay required funds into trust.

The applicant sought review of an employment standards order but failed to submit payment of the required funds in accordance with section 68(7) of the Employment Standards Act.

Consequently, the Board terminated the application.

Stella Pinnock o/a Harmony House v. Donalee Daley and Ministry of Labour, 2001 CanLII 20846

John Morgan Lewis

Union decertified following a representation vote where a majority opposed the responding party.

The applicant applied to terminate the responding party's bargaining rights for a unit of roofers employed by N. Comm Roofing.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the responding party, and with no statements of desire filed, the Board declared that the responding party no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

Jose Dutra v. Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 562, 2001 CanLII 12509

John Morgan Lewis

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 matter will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1059 v. Lafarge Canada Inc., 2001 CanLII 15141

John Morgan Lewis