Marilyn Silverman

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent paramedical employees currently represented by the intervenor union.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support and ordered a representation vote.

The intervenor raised several objections, including alleged unfair labour practices, breaches of a court order and union constitution, and procedural defects, all of which the Board dismissed as grounds to halt the vote.

However, because the intervenor alleged the application was untimely under sections 7(4) or 7(5) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board directed that the ballot box be sealed pending a determination on timeliness.

A dissenting Board member would not have ordered the vote until the timeliness issue was resolved, citing prejudice to the incumbent union.

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the union and ordered a certificate to issue.

The applicants filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that the responding union violated section 74.

The Board noted that the applicants' employment relations appeared to be governed by the Police Services Act, which would deprive the Board of jurisdiction.

The Board directed the responding party to provide its position on the jurisdictional issue within 10 days.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

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

The intervenor requested reconsideration of the Board's decision to order a representation vote and seal the ballot box pending the determination of a timeliness objection.

The intervenor argued that directing the vote in the face of a timeliness objection was an error of law and a breach of natural justice.

The Board denied the request for reconsideration, holding that the order was made in the exercise of its statutory powers and that if the application is ultimately found to be untimely, it will be dismissed.

The intervenor requested reconsideration of the Board's decision to order a representation vote and seal the ballot box pending the determination of a timeliness objection.

The intervenor argued that directing a vote in the face of a timeliness objection was an error of law and a breach of natural justice.

The Board denied the request for reconsideration, noting that the vote was ordered within the usual 5-day timeframe in the exercise of its statutory powers, and that if the application is ultimately found to be untimely, it will be dismissed.

A concurring opinion emphasized the importance of holding a speedy vote to maintain labour stability, while a dissenting member reiterated their previous dissent.

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

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed within the time fixed under Rule 62 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.

Consequently, the Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

In an application for certification, the responding party requested a delay of the scheduled representation vote.

The responding party argued that although the application was delivered in accordance with the Board's rules, it was not dealt with for various reasons.

The Board denied the request, finding no persuasive reason to depart from its usual procedures in ordering votes.

The intervenor requested an order prohibiting a named individual from acting as a scrutineer for the applicant union during a representation vote, alleging violations of the Labour Relations Act.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to make the requested order, noting that a Board returning officer would be present to supervise the vote and that any issues arising could be raised at a subsequent hearing.

The intervenor requested an order to prevent a named individual from acting as a scrutineer for the applicant during a representation vote, citing unproven allegations of violations of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board declined to make the requested order, noting that a Board returning officer would be present to supervise the vote and that any issues could be raised at a subsequent hearing.

A concurring opinion noted that the intervenor could later seek to prove the case for another vote.

The applicant union filed an application for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Upon examining the application and membership evidence, the Board determined that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

Accordingly, the Board directed that a representation vote be held for the eligible employees.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor union.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least 40% of the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The responding party's section 8.1 notice was dismissed as it did not dispute the unit description or employee estimate.

The Board directed a representation vote but ordered the ballot box sealed pending the resolution of the intervenor's timeliness objection under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The International Association of Firefighters requested an extension of time to file its response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the deadline to September 8, 2000.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification for a bargaining unit of part-time employees at Atikokan General Hospital currently represented by the intervenor.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had sufficient membership support to warrant a representation vote.

The Board dismissed the intervenor's requests to dismiss the application based on alleged breaches of a court order, union constitution, and Board rules.

However, because the intervenor challenged the timeliness of the application under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board ordered that the ballot box be sealed following the vote.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had sufficient membership support to warrant a representation vote.

The responding party's section 8.1 objection was dismissed as it did not dispute the bargaining unit description or numbers.

The intervenor raised several objections, including untimeliness under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

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

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor.

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it had sufficient membership support to warrant a representation vote.

The Board dismissed the intervenor's requests to dismiss the application based on alleged unfair labour practices, breach of a court order, and technical breaches of the Rules of Procedure.

However, because the intervenor raised a timeliness objection under section 7(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board ordered that the ballot box be sealed following the representation vote until the timeliness issue is resolved.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

The Board found that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union at the time the application was made.

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

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

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.

The applicant union filed an application for certification to represent employees of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4400 in the City of Toronto.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members at the time the application was made.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken and established the voting constituency, with provisions for segregating ballots of disputed individuals.

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 not less than forty percent 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 of the employees in the bargaining unit.