L. Lenkinski

The complainant union alleged that the respondent employer violated sections 66 and 80(1) of the Labour Relations Act by refusing to re-hire a former employee for a part-time position because of his union activities and his testimony in previous Board proceedings.

The employer claimed the refusal was due to the employee's limited availability and lack of initiative.

The Board found that the employer failed to discharge its reverse onus under section 89(5) of the Act to prove that its decision was entirely free of anti-union animus, particularly because the employer failed to call the managers who actually made the hiring decision.

The Board drew an adverse inference from this failure and ordered the employer to offer the employee a part-time position and compensate him for lost wages.

The complainant union alleged that the employer violated sections 66 and 70 of the Labour Relations Act by requiring two employees to withdraw their grievances as a condition of accepting alternative job offers after their positions were declared redundant.

The Board found that while the employer made the withdrawal of grievances a pre-condition to the job offers, this conduct occurred in the context of attempting to settle the dispute and fulfill its collective agreement obligations.

The Board concluded that the employer's actions did not constitute unlawful coercion, intimidation, or a threat of penalty under the Act, and dismissed the complaint.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees applied for certification of a part-time bargaining unit at the Toronto General Hospital.

The central issue was whether students employed during the school vacation period should be included in the part-time unit or excluded.

The Hospital argued for their exclusion, citing potential conflicts of interest and the viability of a separate student unit.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board applied its established policy of grouping part-time employees and summer students together to avoid undue fragmentation.

Finding no compelling evidence of irreconcilable conflict or that the students could form a viable separate unit, the Board ordered the inclusion of summer students in the part-time bargaining unit and issued a certificate.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

A preliminary issue arose regarding whether certain workers supplied to the respondent by a temporary help agency (Manpower Services) were employees of the respondent or of the agency for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board found that while the agency handled payroll and administrative functions, the respondent exercised fundamental day-to-day control over the workers' working lives, including assigning work, supervising, and determining hours.

The Board concluded that the respondent was the true employer and directed the matter to be re-listed to resolve outstanding certification issues.

One Board member dissented, finding the workers were employees of the agency.

The applicant employee applied to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights.

The union challenged the voluntariness of the decertification petition, alleging employer interference because the applicant had a social relationship with the plant manager.

The Board found no evidence that management promoted the petition or that employees would perceive management involvement.

The Board concluded the petition was a voluntary expression of employee wishes and directed a representation vote.

One Board member dissented, finding the social relationship tainted the petition.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A group of employees filed a petition opposing the certification, which included signatures of employees who had previously signed union membership cards.

The Board held a hearing to determine whether the petition represented a voluntary change of heart.

The sole witness for the objectors provided inconsistent and implausible testimony regarding the origination and circulation of the petition.

The Board concluded the petition was unreliable and declined to order a representation vote.

As the union demonstrated membership support in excess of fifty-five percent, interim certification was granted pending the resolution of the bargaining unit status of four individuals.