Representation vote directed after employer failed to respond to union's application for certification.
The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.
The responding party failed to file a response within the stipulated time.
Based on the application and membership evidence, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found 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.
Board directs representation vote for security services employees following union certification application.
The United Steelworkers of America applied for certification to represent employees of Gosselin Security Services in Essex County.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board found the applicant to be a trade union and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.
Finding that at least 40% of the proposed unit were union members, the Board directed a representation vote to be held on August 15, 2001.
Matter adjourned sine die for up to one year due to lack of party submissions.
The applicant filed a matter before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
Neither party made submissions as to why the matter should not be adjourned sine die following a previous Board decision.
The Board ordered the matter adjourned sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.
Application for certification dismissed due to insufficient union membership evidence.
The applicant union filed an application for certification.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board reviewed the membership evidence and concluded that it could not be satisfied that at least forty per cent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit appeared to be members of the union at the time the application was made.
Consequently, the application for certification was dismissed.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicants sought to withdraw their application against the responding party union.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
Respondents breached human rights settlement by failing to secure continuing employment for the complainant.
The Complainant alleged that the Respondents breached a settlement agreement resolving a previous human rights complaint and engaged in reprisal.
The Board of Inquiry found that the Respondents breached the settlement by failing to make reasonable efforts to secure continuing employment for the Complainant and by failing to give her priority for vacant positions, instead imposing a new Cree language requirement.
The reprisal allegations were dismissed.
The Board awarded $5,000 in general damages and compensation for lost wages.
Union certification granted following successful representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of radiation therapists and related staff at the responding party's cancer centre.
Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent 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.
The applicant, Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association Local 540, sought to withdraw its application against Canadian Curtis Refrigeration Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Applications adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.
The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matters will be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.
Request to schedule hearing for withdrawn application denied; applicant must file new breach of settlement complaint.
The applicant requested the Board to schedule a hearing for an application that had previously been withdrawn pursuant to a settlement agreement.
The Board noted that because the application was withdrawn, there was no matter currently before it.
The Board advised the applicant that if his complaint pertained to the union's failure to comply with the settlement, he could file a new application under section 96(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging a breach of the settlement pursuant to section 96(7).
Adjournment request denied due to failure to provide details regarding the unavailable attendee.
The respondent requested an adjournment of a hearing scheduled for August 1, 2001, citing the unavailability of a person scheduled to attend.
The applicant opposed the request.
The Board denied the adjournment because the respondent failed to identify the person, explain why their attendance was required, or provide the reason for their inability to attend.
Extension of time granted to responding parties to file their responses.
The responding party Service Employees International Union, Local 204 requested an extension of time to file its response, with correspondence from the applicant.
The Board granted the extension, allowing SEIU and the other responding parties until August 17, 2001, to file their responses.
Union certification application dismissed after representation vote failed to achieve majority support.
A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.
No statement of desire to make representations was filed.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act regarding the effect on any subsequent application filed within one year.
Representation vote directed in application for termination of bargaining rights.
The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations 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 applicant, Ontario Public Service Employees Union, sought to withdraw its application against Toronto Preschool Autism Service and Surrey Place Centre.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Ballot box sealed in representation vote pending identification of potentially affected incumbent trade union.
The responding party filed a late response to a certification application, indicating it was bound by a franchise agreement to respect a collective agreement but failing to attach it or provide contact details for the affected trade union.
The Board directed that the ballot box in the upcoming representation vote be sealed until further order and ordered the responding party to immediately provide the contact information for the trade union signatory to the collective agreement.
Deadline for filing a response or intervention extended to August 17, 2001.
The responding party requested an extension of time to file a response or intervention.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the deadline to August 17, 2001.
Union granted leave to withdraw certification application following representation vote.
Following a representation vote, the applicant union requested leave to withdraw its application for certification.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application and noted that the effect of the withdrawal under section 7(10) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 would be determined if a subsequent application is filed within one year.
Union certification application dismissed at threshold due to failure to sign the membership evidence declaration.
The applicant trade union filed an application for certification along with membership evidence and an unsigned Declaration Verifying Membership Evidence (Form A-4).
The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that it could not give any weight to the membership evidence without the assurances of a properly completed and signed Form A-4.
Consequently, the application for certification was dismissed at the threshold stage.
Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed due to defective, undated, and unsigned employee evidence.
The applicant applied to terminate the responding party union's bargaining rights.
The Board dismissed the application because the evidence filed did not comply with the statutory and procedural requirements.
Specifically, the signatures were undated, many were printed rather than signed, and the documents did not clearly indicate that the signatories wished to terminate the union's bargaining rights.
The application was dismissed without prejudice to filing a fresh, timely, and properly supported application.