Marilyn Silverman

The applicant employee 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 was 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 among the eligible employees.

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

The Board received correspondence from an employee of the responding party.

The Board directed the Registrar to provide the employee with a notice of hearing and a copy of the decision, and directed that the panel scheduled to hear the matter determine whether the employee should be added as an interested party.

In an application to terminate bargaining rights, the applicant advised the Board that the employer had failed to post the required notices, meaning employees likely did not know about the upcoming representation vote.

The Board cancelled the originally scheduled vote and rescheduled it, ordering the employer to post the application, notices, and Board decisions forthwith.

The applicant filed an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty per cent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant applied under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party's bargaining rights.

The Board found the application timely and that at least forty per cent of the employees in the bargaining unit had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant applied under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to terminate the responding party's bargaining rights.

The Board found the application timely and that at least forty per cent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding employer used non-union members for construction work.

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 declared the employer bound by the collective agreement, found a violation, and ordered the employer to pay $26,880.00 in damages and $214.00 in filing fees.

The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party's bargaining rights.

The Board found the application timely and that at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed a representation vote to be held.

The responding party's request to dismiss the application under section 63(16), alleging employer initiation, was deferred to the panel scheduled to hear the application.

The applicant union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking to displace the intervenor as the bargaining agent for the responding party's employees.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to warrant a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held, with eligible voters asked to choose between the applicant and the intervenor.

The applicant filed an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty per cent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant filed an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit at Sentry Electric Inc. The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty per cent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The responding party's request to dismiss the application under section 63(16) on the basis of employer initiation was deferred to the panel scheduled to hear the application.

The applicant union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking to displace the intervenor union as the bargaining agent.

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 warrant a representation vote and directed that a vote be held among the eligible employees.

The applicant employer filed applications under sections 96 and 144 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that employees were engaging in an unlawful strike and that the responding union authorized it.

As the application was at the allegation stage, the Board outlined the statutory framework prohibiting unlawful strikes during the term of a collective agreement.

Recognizing the need for expedition in such matters, the Board scheduled an expedited hearing and directed the responding parties to file their replies.

The applicant union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking to displace the intervenor union as the bargaining agent for carpenters and carpenters' apprentices employed by the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to warrant a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken and established the voting constituency.

The applicant applied under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party's bargaining rights.

The Board found the application timely and that at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The responding party raised issues regarding the presence and status of employees in the bargaining unit on the application date, which the Board deferred to the panel scheduled to hear the application.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking to displace the intervenor as the bargaining agent for employees of the responding party.

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 proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate and directed that a representation vote be taken, with the ballot box sealed pending further order or agreement of the parties.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking to displace the intervenor as the bargaining agent for a unit of employees of the responding party.

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 proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate and directed that a representation vote be taken, with the ballot box sealed pending further order or agreement of the parties.

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant applied to the Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party trade union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty per cent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The responding party's objection that the application was not brought on the proper construction form was dismissed.

The applicant trade union filed a displacement application for certification.

The responding employer disputed the applicant's estimate of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found the applicant's proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate but could not be absolutely certain that 40 per cent or more of the individuals in the unit were members of the union.

The Board ordered a representation vote but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending resolution of the disputes.