Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 2, 2000

Union certified as bargaining agent for school board employees following successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of office, clerical, and technical employees of the responding party school board.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with all outstanding disputes resolved by agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation v. Halton District School Board, 2000 CanLII 6293

Laura Trachuk

Union certification application dismissed after failing to obtain majority support in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, but the union failed to obtain more than 50% of the ballots cast.

No statements of desire to make representations were filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the union for this bargaining unit.

Canadian Union of Operating Engineers and General Workers v. Quality Rework Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 6251

Laura Trachuk

Representation vote directed for employees of Stratford Parallel Transit following union certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of Stratford Parallel Transit.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.

Finding that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed unit were union members, the Board directed that a representation vote be held.

Local Union 636 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Stratford Parallel Transit, 2000 CanLII 10801

Laura Trachuk

Application dismissed after majority of employees voted in favour of the responding party union.

The applicant filed an application with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

A representation vote was directed and taken, resulting in more than fifty per cent of the ballots being cast in favour of the responding party union.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Board dismissed the application and ordered the destruction of the ballots after 30 days.

Women’s Crisis Services of Cambridge and North Dumfries v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, 2000 CanLII 7382

Laura Trachuk

Applicant permitted to amend duty of fair representation application; time for responses extended.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the responding party union violated its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The applicant subsequently sought to make substantial amendments to her application and indicated optimism that the matter would be resolved.

The Board permitted the amendment and extended the deadline for the responding party and any intervenor to file their responses.

Cormie v. Laurentian University Faculty Association (LUFA), 2000 CanLII 13392

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 2000

Employment standards file to be terminated following final settlement between the parties.

The parties reached a final settlement in an employment standards matter.

The Adjudicator/Referee directed the parties to advise by a specified date if further involvement was required, failing which the file would be terminated.

Laurie Chalabardo v. National Bank of Canada and Ministry of Labour, 2000 CanLII 13123

Representation vote ordered for agreed-upon bargaining unit in union certification application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.

Finding that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed unit were union members, the Board ordered a representation vote.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Nipissing Area Joint Hospitals Laundry Inc., 2000 CanLII 7661

R. R. Montague

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 31, 2000

J. A. Rundle

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Application adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.

The Association of Professional Student Services Personnel filed an application against the London District Catholic School Board.

On the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.

Association of Professional Student Services Personnel v. London District Catholic School Board, 2000 CanLII 5440

Vince Meli

Stephen J. Shamie

12 cases1989–2020

Heather MacLean

Gavin Leeb

97 cases1996–2018

Frank Inglis

Donna M. D’Andrea

8 cases2000–2017

David Wright

188 cases1989–2025

Connie Huziak

4 cases2000–2001

Cindy Thompson

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 21, 2000

Termination application dismissed as untimely because a lawful strike was still ongoing.

The applicant employees filed an application for termination of bargaining rights.

The responding party union objected on the basis that the application was untimely under section 67(3)(a) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, because a lawful strike was ongoing.

Although a memorandum of agreement had been signed and most employees had returned to work, 20 employees remained off work pursuant to the strike on the application date.

The Board found that a strike was still in effect and that the statute does not require a complete cessation of work or disruption for a strike to continue.

The Board dismissed the application as untimely.

The Employees of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario v. Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union, 2000 CanLII 12296

Vince Meli

Stephen J. Shamie

12 cases1989–2020

Rena Khan

123 cases2000–2025

Karen Panetta

1 case2000–2000

Heather MacLean

Gavin Leeb

97 cases1996–2018

Frank Inglis

Donna M. D’Andrea

8 cases2000–2017

David Wright

188 cases1989–2025

Connie Huziak

4 cases2000–2001

Cindy Thompson

Carol Cosman

1 case2000–2000

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 13, 2000

Application for termination of bargaining rights dismissed as untimely under s. 67(3) of the LRA.

The applicant employees filed an application for termination of bargaining rights.

The responding union objected on the basis that the application was untimely under section 67(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

A vote was held and the ballot box was sealed.

Following a hearing, the Board orally dismissed the application as untimely and directed that the ballots be destroyed without being counted.

Written reasons were to follow.

The Employees of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario v. Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union, 2000 CanLII 12295

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 10, 2000

J. A. Ronson

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

D. A. Patterson

OLRB0 cases1986–2001

Union certification granted following successful representation vote and agreement on bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for employees of the responding party.

The parties resolved all outstanding disputes and agreed on the appropriate bargaining unit.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Bupont Motors Inc., 2000 CanLII 6659

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 4, 2000

Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board on consent of the parties.

The parties agreed to withdraw multiple applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave and the applications were withdrawn.

Industrial Wood & Allied Workers of Canada, Local 500 v. Interforest Ltd., 2000 CanLII 6965

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 4, 2000

Applicant directed to file submissions responding to request to dismiss reprisal complaint without a hearing.

The applicant filed a reprisal complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The responding party requested that the application be dismissed without a hearing on the basis that the applicant failed to plead facts disclosing a violation of the Act.

The Board directed the applicant to file submissions in response to the request to dismiss, after which the Board will decide whether to hold a hearing.

Ross MacKinnon v. Scandura (CANADA), INC., 2000 CanLII 3328

S. Quigley

Scott Williams

13 cases1994–2016

Paul Eddy

2 cases1999–1999

Debbie Beasley

Dan Haffey

5 cases1999–2001

Bruce Arnott

15 cases1999–2011

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 23, 1999

Health and safety appeal dismissed as moot because the requested ergonomic assessment was already provided.

The applicant worker members of a joint health and safety committee appealed a Ministry of Labour inspector's decision to rescind an order requiring the Toronto Transit Commission to conduct an ergonomic assessment of new bus driver compartments.

Prior to the hearing, the employer provided an ergonomic review report.

The Board dismissed the appeal as moot, finding that the requested assessment had been provided and that any further adjudication regarding the actual ergonomic safety of the buses would require a new determination by an inspector.

Workers Committee Members M. Bertoia, W. McNaught and J. Mullins, Danforth Joint Health and Safety Committee v. Toronto Transit Commission and Ministry of Labour, 1999 CanLII 20179

Sarah Downie

Mike Duden

2 cases1995–1999

Kelvin Kucey

25 cases1993–2026

Jason Hanson

12 cases1988–2008

Hans Reupke

Brenda Lucas

Al Richards

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardNov 2, 1999

Employee holding distinct part-time positions both inside and outside the bargaining unit is eligible to vote.

The union applied for certification and a representation vote was held.

One ballot was segregated and challenged by the union on the basis that the employee worked on the front desk and was therefore excluded from the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The employer argued the employee was in the bargaining unit because she was hired as a housekeeper and continued to work housekeeping shifts.

The Board found that the employee held two distinct part-time positions, one in housekeeping (within the unit) and one on the front desk (excluded).

Because she held a part-time position within the bargaining unit, she was entitled to cast a ballot.

The Board directed a new representation vote to protect the secrecy of her ballot.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Journey's End Midland Inc., 1999 CanLII 20200

Lisa S. Goodfellow

7 cases1999–2016

Christopher Schiffmann

3 cases1999–2005

Brian Blumenthal

8 cases1999–2011

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardOct 28, 1999

Application for review dismissed; termination of superintendents during maternity leave was for bona fide business reasons.

The applicants, a superintendent couple, sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision not to issue an order against their former employer, a condominium corporation.

The applicants alleged they were terminated because the wife took maternity leave, contrary to the Employment Standards Act.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the employer successfully rebutted the presumption of reprisal, demonstrating that the terminations were motivated by a change in the board of directors, a new property management company, and a legitimate reorganization of building services.

The application was dismissed.

Shafiqur Rahman and Shabnam Rahman v. York Condominium Corporation 506 and Ministry of Labour, 1999 CanLII 19489

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 24, 1999

Multi-site bargaining units ordered for amalgamated hospital to facilitate program transfers and staff mobility.

The applicant hospital, created by the amalgamation of three formerly independent hospitals, applied under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997 to determine the appropriate bargaining unit structure.

Several responding unions argued for site-specific bargaining units to preserve the independence of the Women's College Hospital site and its focus on women's health.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board determined that multi-site bargaining units encompassing all three locations were appropriate, as they would facilitate the necessary transfer of programs and staff while maintaining the legislative balance struck in the amalgamation act.

Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, 1999 CanLII 19983

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 21, 1999

Board directs single representation vote for competing certification applications filed one day apart.

Two unions, the IAMAW and CAW-Canada, filed certification applications for the same bargaining unit at Bombardier Aerospace one day apart.

The IAMAW argued that CAW-Canada lacked the requisite 40 percent support due to alleged membership revocations.

The Board rejected this argument, noting that under sections 8(2) and 8(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the 40 percent threshold is assessed based solely on the information in the application.

Finding that both unions met the threshold, the Board exercised its discretion to treat the applications as filed on the same date and directed a single representation vote with both unions and a 'no union' option on the ballot.

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers v. Bombardier Aerospace, 1999 CanLII 19980

Robert A. Stewart

5 cases1987–1999

Mark Stone

12 cases1997–2013

Jeffrey M. Andrew

11 cases1994–2010

Brian Cavanagh

Laura Trachuk

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 22, 1999

Bad faith bargaining complaint dismissed as incomplete employer proposals were not capable of forming a collective agreement upon ratification.

The union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging that the employer parties bargained in bad faith by failing to recognize a collective agreement that the union claimed was ratified by its members.

The negotiations involved three parties: the union, the taxi brokerage, and an associates committee.

The union had put two separate, incomplete, and somewhat inconsistent employer proposals to a ratification vote.

The Board dismissed the complaint, finding that the proposals were not complete or intended as final offers capable of forming a collective agreement upon ratification, and that the employers had not violated the Act.

Retail Wholesale Canada v. Metro Cab Company Limited, 1999 CanLII 20004

Susan Ursel

44 cases1985–2024

Sean Fitzpatrick

11 cases1994–2021

Raj Anand

54 cases1981–2017

M. Kate Stephenson

30 cases1998–2014

Melissa Kronick

19 cases1994–2014

John McNamee

9 cases1982–2000

James Robbins

13 cases1998–2001

David Wright

188 cases1989–2025

Cynthia Wilkey

9 cases1999–2014

Bernard Fishbein

79 cases1982–2011

Barry Brown

25 cases1983–2014

Laura Trachuk