Request for extension of time to file material granted.
The responding hospitals requested an extension of time to file their material with the Board.
The Board granted the request, extending the time limit for filing and delivering all respondents' material until October 31, 2001.
Representation vote directed in application for certification, with disputed ballots to be segregated.
The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of 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, with outstanding disputes regarding the geographical scope and inclusion of certain managerial positions to be dealt with at a hearing after the vote, if necessary.
Union certification granted following a successful representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Lambton Metal Works Ltd. Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.
Application adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.
The applicant filed an application against the responding union.
On the agreement of the parties, the 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.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
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The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.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 sought to withdraw the application.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Application for certification dismissed after union failed to win majority in representation vote.
The applicant union filed an application for certification.
Following a representation vote where not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.
The Board also noted the potential application of section 10(3) of the Act to any subsequent application filed within one year.
The applicant, Canadian Union of Public Employees, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Kingston & Frontenac Housing Corporation.
Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant union filed applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The applications were subsequently withdrawn with leave of the Board.
Applications alleging union breached duty of fair representation and engaged in coercion regarding settlement dismissed.
The applicant filed applications alleging the union breached its duty of fair representation and that the union and employer engaged in intimidation and coercion regarding a settlement agreement that resulted in his resignation.
The Board dismissed the section 76 application on a preliminary motion for failing to state a prima facie case, as there was no evidence the applicant ceased to be a union member.
Following a consultation, the Board dismissed the section 74 application, finding the applicant voluntarily executed a binding settlement agreement and the union did not act arbitrarily, discriminatorily, or in bad faith.
Duty of fair representation application dismissed after applicant failed to attend the scheduled consultation.
The applicant filed an application alleging that the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The applicant failed to attend the scheduled consultation, alleging bias and conflict of interest against the Board.
The Board dismissed the application due to the applicant's non-attendance, noting that the allegations of bias were without merit and that the applicant failed to provide evidence to establish her case.
Representation votes ordered in displacement applications for certification of full-time and part-time university employees.
The applicant union filed displacement applications for certification for full-time and part-time employees at McMaster University, who were currently represented by the intervenor.
The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to warrant representation votes.
The Board ordered separate representation votes for the full-time and part-time bargaining units, with the issue of the applicant's trade union status and the final determination of the appropriate bargaining units deferred until after the votes.
Board directs representation vote in application for certification by unestablished trade union.
The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party daycare centre.
The Board found that the applicant had not previously established its trade union status and directed the filing of materials.
Finding that at least 40% of the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union, the Board directed a representation vote to be held on October 11, 2001.
Board directs representation vote in union certification application with segregated ballots for disputed positions.
The applicant trade union filed an application for certification to represent employees of the responding party.
The Board found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, 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.
As the responding party disputed the geographic scope of the bargaining unit, the Board directed that individuals in disputed positions could cast segregated ballots.
Request to delay representation vote pending reconsideration dismissed under section 8(5) of the Labour Relations Act.
The Board directed a representation vote and ordered the ballot box sealed due to outstanding issues, including the validity of a voluntary recognition agreement involving the intervenors.
Intervenor #2 requested a delay of the vote pending a request for reconsideration.
The Board declined the request to delay the vote, citing section 8(5) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, which requires representation votes to occur within five days of the application.
The applicant requested to withdraw the application.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
Extension of time granted for filing written submissions on motions.
The applicant requested an extension of time to file written submissions regarding motions brought by the responding party and intervenor.
Noting the responding party's representative would be out of the country, the Board granted the extension, directing the applicant to file by September 4, 2001, and the responding party and intervenor to file by September 11, 2001.
The Board also reminded the parties to copy all communications to the other parties pursuant to Rule 33.
Board directs applicant to explain three-year delay in filing duty of fair representation complaint.
The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union three years after his termination for sleeping on the job.
The union and the employer requested that the application be dismissed without a hearing due to undue delay and failure to state a prima facie case.
The Board removed the employer as a responding party, noting that section 74 applies only to trade unions.
The Board directed the applicant to provide written submissions explaining the three-year delay and clarifying the nature of his claims against the union before deciding whether to dismiss the application.
Request to dismiss duty of fair representation application for lack of prima facie case denied.
The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging a breach of the union's duty of fair representation under section 74.
The responding union and intervenor employer requested that the application be dismissed for failing to disclose a prima facie case.
The Board declined to vary its earlier decision to proceed to consultation, noting that the intervenor's submissions could be dealt with at that time.
The applicant, United Steelworkers of America, sought to withdraw its applications against the responding party, Casino Rama Services Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications.