J. Wilson

Ian Springate

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 11, 1982

Union membership evidence rejected where employees borrowed the application fee without intent to repay.

In an application for certification, the Ontario Labour Relations Board considered whether to accept membership evidence for two employees who had their one-dollar application fee paid by a co-worker.

The Board found that the employees had no intention of repaying the co-worker, meaning there was no financial sacrifice on their part, and therefore rejected their membership evidence.

However, the Board declined to reject the remaining membership evidence collected by the union representative, as he believed the loans were bona fide, and also declined to reject all evidence on the basis of insufficient inquiries by the Form 8 declarant.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 506 v. North American Canadian Developments Ltd., 1982 CanLII 1057

James B. Noonan

17 cases1980–2000

B. W. Binning

11 cases1980–2000

A. M. Minsky

94 cases1980–2001

N. B. Satterfield

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 14, 1981

Board rules landscaping work on construction sites falls within construction industry and its subcontracting may be regulated.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board alleging the respondent employer violated the subcontracting provision of their provincial collective agreement by subcontracting landscaping work to a non-union employer.

The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts to determine whether horticulture work was a lawful subject for bargaining and whether its subcontracting could be regulated by the agreement.

The Board found that the landscaping work fell within the definition of the construction industry and that the horticulture exception in the Act did not exclude such work per se.

The Board concluded that horticulture work is a lawful subject for bargaining and its subcontracting may be lawfully regulated by the collective agreement.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Ontario Provincial District Council v. The Jackson-Lewis Company Limited, 1981 CanLII 917

Kevin Hebner

Jeffrey Egner

7 cases1980–1981

F. Kan

Derek L. Rogers

13 cases1980–2012

J. Wilson

Ian Springate

D. B. Archer

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 18, 1981

Sale of business declared for office buildings, but purchaser not bound by unratified settlement.

The applicant union brought an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act alleging a sale of a business from the predecessor employer to the respondent purchaser.

The predecessor owned two office buildings and employed cleaning staff represented by the union.

Prior to the sale, the predecessor contracted out the cleaning operations to a third party and later sold the buildings to the respondent, assigning the cleaning contract.

The Board found that a sale of a business occurred and that the union's bargaining rights continued to apply to the respondent.

However, the Board held that a prior memorandum of settlement was never ratified by the predecessor, meaning the respondent was not bound by any subsisting collective agreement.

The Board deferred determining the true employer status of the cleaning staff as the third-party contractor was not a party to the proceedings.

Service Employees' Union, Local 204 v. Prudent Investments Inc., 1981 CanLII 1041

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 12, 1981

D. E. Franks

OLRB0 cases1980–1987

Application for certification dismissed; Board refused to carve out Quality Control Department from tag end unit.

The applicant trade union applied for certification for a bargaining unit consisting solely of the Quality Control Department employees.

The respondent argued for a normal tag end unit.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that it was not appropriate to depart from its policy regarding tag end units and refused to carve out the Quality Control Department.

As the applicant had less than forty-five per cent membership in the appropriate tag end unit, the application for certification was dismissed.

Canadian Union of Operating Engineers & General Workers v. Cryovac Division W.R. Grace & Co. of Canada Limited, 1981 CanLII 863

Stanley Simpson

22 cases1981–2001

D. L. Brisbin

8 cases1980–1987

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 12, 1981

D. E. Franks

OLRB0 cases1980–1987

Jurisdictional dispute complaint dismissed because the complainant union's members refused to perform the assigned work.

The complainant union filed a jurisdictional dispute under section 91 of the Labour Relations Act regarding the assignment of work involving the insertion and removal of blanks in standpipes on a coke oven.

The employer had assigned the work on a fifty-fifty basis between the complainant and the respondent union.

The complainant union disputed this assignment, claiming 100% of the work, and its members subsequently walked off the job and refused to perform any of the work, including their assigned 50%.

The Board dismissed the complaint on preliminary objections, holding that the complainant could not claim entitlement to work that its members had explicitly refused to perform.

International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Local 128 v. Sheafer-Townsend Construction Limited, 1981 CanLII 970

N. B. Satterfield

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 5, 1981

Board grants certification for masonry restoration employees, finding no collective agreement bar from intervener.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent masonry restoration employees of the respondent in the construction industry.

The intervener claimed that a subsisting collective agreement between it and the respondent barred the application.

The Board found that the intervener had acted as though it did not hold bargaining rights for the restoration employees, effectively abandoning any such rights if they existed.

Consequently, the Board held there was no collective agreement bar, found the application timely, and issued certificates to the applicant.

Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons' International Association, Local 172 v. Clifford Masonry Limited, 1981 CanLII 845

R. Kuhm

R. Flood

N. Watt

M. Horan

4 cases1980–2001

M. Gordon

K. Waisglass

D. Peel

B. Fishhein

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 27, 1981

Board declined to issue interim direction relieving employer of duty to bargain pending decertification application.

The applicant filed an application to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights.

In the interim, the intervenor employer sought a direction from the Board relieving it of its obligation to bargain with the union until the termination application was resolved, or guidance on the scope of its bargaining obligation.

The Board declined to issue the requested directions, noting that a termination application does not automatically relieve an employer of its duty to bargain, and that it would be premature to address the issue in the absence of a specific unfair labour practice complaint.

Chris Martin v. Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, Local Union No. 540, 1981 CanLII 797

R. A. MacDermid

2 cases1981–1982

Catherina Spoel

C. A. Cumiskey

4 cases1981–1983

R. A. Furness

OLRB0 cases1980–1991

J. Wilson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 23, 1981

B. Lee

OLRB0 cases1981–1985

Office and clerical staff included in retail store bargaining unit due to community of interest.

The applicant union applied for certification for employees at a K-Mart store.

A pre-hearing representation vote was held, with the ballots of office and clerical staff segregated pending a determination of whether they should be included in the bargaining unit.

The Board examined the duties of the disputed employees, including merchandise co-ordinators, an advertising person, and various office clerks.

Finding a functional integration and community of interest between the office/clerical staff and the sales employees, the Board concluded they should be included in the same bargaining units (full-time and part-time).

The Board directed the ballots to be unsealed and counted.

Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AF'L:CIO:CLC v. K-Mart Canada Limited, 1981 CanLII 930

Win. R. Herridge

2 cases1981–1981

Win. Howard

Tom Wilson

R. A. Werry

38 cases1980–1994

M. Lloyd

Kerry Lee

2 cases1981–1982

G. Grossman

32 cases1980–1987

Gary Graham

7 cases1981–2017

Elizabeth Forster

19 cases1980–2015

Edw. Vanderkloet

A. M. Minsky

94 cases1980–2001

R. A. Furness

OLRB0 cases1980–1991

J. Wilson

D. B. Archer

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 9, 1981

Motions to amend jurisdictional dispute complaint granted; arguments on merits of requested relief held premature.

The complainants in a jurisdictional dispute sought to amend their complaint by adding a request to alter the bargaining unit and by providing a more detailed description of the work in dispute.

The respondents opposed the amendments, arguing that the Board lacked jurisdiction to grant the requested relief and that the dispute could not be expanded beyond the original complaint.

The Board granted both motions, holding that it had jurisdiction under section 58 of its Rules of Procedure to permit the amendments and that arguments regarding the legal sustainability of the requested relief were premature at the commencement of the hearing.

Toronto-Central Ontario Building and Construction Trades Council v. Simcoe Mechanical Contracting Limited, 1981 CanLII 973

Tom Carron

N. B. Satterfield

M.A. Ross

OLRB0 cases1980–1986

J. Wilson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 17, 1981

Employer committed an unfair labour practice by terminating an employee shortly after his reinstatement.

The union filed a complaint alleging that the employer terminated the grievor's employment because of his known support for the union, contrary to section 58 of the Labour Relations Act.

The grievor had recently been reinstated following a previous Board order finding an earlier termination to be an unfair labour practice.

Shortly after his reinstatement, the grievor was denied a shift bonus and a wage increase, and was ordered to transfer to another branch.

When he refused, he was fired.

The Board found that the employer failed to discharge its burden of proving that the termination was not motivated by anti-union considerations.

The Board ordered the employer to reinstate the grievor to his former position on the day shift, grant him a wage increase, and fully compensate him for lost wages with interest.

United Steelworkers of America v. Sling-Choker Manufacturing Limited, 1981 CanLII 979

O. Hudges

OLRB0 cases1981–1981

J. Wilson

Ian Springate

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 11, 1981

Complaint dismissed as res judicata; Board lacks jurisdiction to arbitrate collective agreement violations.

The complainant, a probationary teacher, filed a complaint alleging his termination violated several provisions of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act.

A previous complaint regarding the same termination had been dismissed by the Board.

The Board applied a doctrine analogous to res judicata, holding that the complainant could not relitigate the termination or raise new allegations that could have been brought in the earlier proceeding.

The Board also found it lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate alleged violations of the collective agreement under section 52(1) of the Act.

The complaint was dismissed.

Dr. Bidhu B. P. Sinha v. Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology, 1981 CanLII 793

P. Seville

M. Morgan

J. Craddock

D. Wyatt

C. Paliare

5 cases1981–2023

N. B. Satterfield

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 8, 1981

Union certified without vote; employee objections deemed involuntary due to employer's threat of closure.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the respondent's group home.

Although the union filed membership cards for more than 55% of the employees, five employees filed statements of desire opposing the application.

The Board inquired into the voluntariness of these statements.

The Board found that the employer had held a meeting expressing opposition to the union, mentioning potential closure of the home, and shortly thereafter sent termination notices to all employees.

The Board concluded that the employer's actions were capable of unduly influencing the employees, rendering the statements of desire involuntary.

The Board declined to order a representation vote and granted certification.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Renaissance Homes Inc., 1981 CanLII 1043

Mark Contini

25 cases1981–2023

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

M. J. Fenwick

J. Wilson

Ian Springate

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardAug 21, 1981

Grievance dismissed; union steward's discharge upheld as safety complaint was found to be a false pretext.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board alleging that the respondent employer unjustly discharged a union steward.

The union argued the discharge violated the provincial agreement and section 24(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, claiming the steward was fired for raising safety concerns about propane fumes.

The Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the steward's conduct was not motivated by genuine health and safety concerns, but rather by a desire to disrupt the job site using a false safety claim.

The Board concluded the employer had just cause for the discharge.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union 38 v. Cooper Construction Company Limited, 1981 CanLII 851

R. D. Howe

OLRB0 cases1980–1993

J. Wilson

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 30, 1981

Summer student hired before but starting work after certification application date excluded from employee count.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The parties disputed whether a summer student, Joanne Johnston, should be included in the employee count on the date of the application.

The student was hired before the application date but did not commence work or attend orientation until after the application date.

Applying its established 'one month rule', the Board held that because she was not at work on the date of the application and had not been at work at any time during the one month period immediately preceding the application, she was not an employee for the purposes of the count.

The Board certified the applicant pending final resolution of the remaining disputed employees.

Health, Office and Professional Employees, Local 1976 v. Brewers Nursing Home, 1981 CanLII 830

T. Spada

3 cases1981–1982

L. Richmond

9 cases1980–2001

J. Phillips

5 cases1981–2017

Gabriella C. Favero

D. Jane Forbes-Roberts

14 cases1981–1986

R. D. Howe

OLRB0 cases1980–1993

J. Wilson

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 2, 1981

Board accepts agreed-upon site-specific cleaning staff bargaining unit in property management industry, avoiding fragmentation concerns.

The applicant trade union applied for certification for a bargaining unit consisting of cleaning staff at a single apartment building managed by the respondent.

The parties agreed on the bargaining unit description.

The Board held a hearing to address concerns about undue fragmentation of the workforce.

Given the history of viable collective bargaining relationships in the property management industry based on similar site-specific cleaning units, and relying on a previous decision involving the same parties at a nearby building, the Board accepted the agreed-upon bargaining unit as appropriate and granted the certificate.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Kaneff Properties Limited, 1981 CanLII 925

G. Weir

2 cases1981–1982

David McKee

85 cases1980–2000

N. B. Satterfield

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 11, 1981

Grievance referral dismissed as untimely; Board declined to extend time limits due to unexplained delay.

The applicant union referred a discharge grievance to the Board for arbitration under section 112a of the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent employer raised a preliminary objection that the referral was untimely.

The Board found that the applicant had delayed progressing the grievance from October 1980 to February 1981 without providing any reasons for the inaction.

Balancing the delay against the potential prejudice to the respondent, the Board declined to exercise its discretion under section 37(5a) of the Act to extend the time limits.

The grievance was deemed not arbitrable and the application was dismissed.

The Millwright District Council of Ontario, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. Hurlenco Limited, 1981 CanLII 904

K. W. Kort

12 cases1981–1999

J. F. O'Brien

C. M. Mitchell

38 cases1980–1999

R. D. Howe

OLRB0 cases1980–1993

J. Wilson

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 11, 1981

Union certified after employee petition opposing certification found involuntary due to perceived management influence.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the respondent nursing home.

A group of employees filed petitions opposing the certification.

The Board held a hearing to determine the voluntariness of the petitions.

The Board found that the employee who circulated the petitions was reasonably perceived by other employees as being in greater proximity to managerial authority, and that she had indicated to signatories that loss of employment or reduction of hours could result from failing to sign.

Consequently, the Board found the petitions were not voluntary and did not cast doubt on the union's membership support.

A certificate was issued to the applicant.

Service Employees International Union, Local 183 AF. of L., C.I.O.. C.L.C. v. Westgate Nursing Home Inc., 1981 CanLII 1032

William Mills

3 cases1980–1982

Stephen McCormack

2 cases1981–1981

Michael Bowman

5 cases1981–2007

James Hayes

66 cases1980–2000

Brock Myles

2 cases1981–1981

Kevin M. Burkett

OLRB0 cases1980–1984

J. Wilson

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 25, 1981

Employer committed unfair labour practice by treating returning strikers' walkout as a mass resignation.

The complainant union alleged that the respondent employer committed unfair labour practices by refusing to allow striking employees to return to work following a Board order.

The employer claimed the employees had engaged in a mass resignation by walking out of a training session and failing to provide notice of absence.

The Board found that the employer's strict application of its absence policy lacked a credible business justification and was motivated by anti-union animus.

The Board ordered the reinstatement of the affected employees with compensation.

United Steelworkers of America v. Fotomat Canada Limited, 1981 CanLII 800

J. Wilson

George W. Adams

OLRB0 cases1980–1984

D. B. Archer