Union's motion to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint for lack of prima facie case denied.
The applicants filed a complaint alleging the union breached its duty of fair representation by failing to assist them in bumping into an inside job to avoid layoff.
The union requested the application be dismissed for failing to make out a prima facie case, arguing the alleged conversation never occurred and the applicants had already accepted severance.
The Board dismissed the union's motion, finding that assuming the applicants' allegations were true, a prima facie breach was pleaded.
The matter was referred to mediation.
Consent order issued directing employer to post $100,000 bond pursuant to collective agreement.
The applicants referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement acknowledging that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement and had violated it by failing to post a required bond.
The Board issued a consent order declaring the violation and directing the responding party to post a $100,000 bond as required by the collective agreement.
Application dismissed; Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to review or censure the conduct of Pay Equity Review Officers.
The employer applied for a hearing regarding a Review Officer's order directing it to make pay equity adjustments.
The employer's application focused entirely on allegations of bias, malice, and improper conduct by the Review Officer and the Pay Equity Office, rather than the substantive merits of the order.
The Pay Equity Office brought a motion to dismiss the application for failing to make out a prima facie case.
The Tribunal granted the motion, holding that its jurisdiction under the Pay Equity Act is limited to conducting de novo hearings on substantive pay equity disputes, and it has no remedial authority to censure or police the conduct of Review Officers.
General release signed upon termination did not bar employee's claim for outstanding pay equity adjustments.
The employer applied to review an Order of a Review Officer requiring it to pay pay equity adjustments to a former employee.
The employer argued that a Memorandum of Settlement and Release signed by the employee upon her termination from full-time employment barred her from seeking the adjustments.
The Tribunal found that the release was negotiated solely to address issues related to the termination of her full-time employment and did not specifically address or satisfy obligations under the Pay Equity Act.
The Tribunal confirmed the Officer's order and directed the employer to pay the outstanding pay equity adjustment of $4,300.27 with interest.
Application for review terminated after employer failed to file the required forms within the time limit.
The employer sought an application for review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.
The Board notified the employer that the application was not filed on the correct form and provided ten days to correct the deficiency.
The employer failed to file the proper forms within the extended time limit.
The Board terminated the matter.
Default judgment granted against employer for unpaid union remittances after failure to respond to grievance referral.
The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding party failed to make remittances to Welfare & Trust Funds.
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 found the responding party breached the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $11,513.59 in unpaid remittances plus the $214.00 filing fee.
Adjournment of director's appeal hearing granted on consent pending settlement discussions and document production.
The applicant, a director of Zettel Metalcraft Ltd., requested an adjournment of a hearing scheduled for January 3, 2001, regarding an appeal of an order to pay.
The adjournment was requested due to an upcoming settlement meeting and outstanding document production issues.
The Ministry of Labour and the CAW-Canada consented to the request.
The Board granted the adjournment and directed the Registrar to reschedule the matter unless advised of a settlement by January 15, 2001.
Employment standards application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant sought to withdraw their application against Inline Fiberglass Ltd. and the Ministry of Labour.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Employers ordered to pay $17,922.73 in unpaid remittances and damages in default grievance proceeding.
The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employers failed to make timely remittances to various Welfare and Trust Funds.
The responding parties failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend within the required time limits.
Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the responding parties were deemed to have accepted all facts stated in the application.
The Board found the responding parties violated the collective agreement and ordered them to pay $17,922.73 in unpaid remittances, liquidated damages, and filing fees.
Board adjourns construction grievance referral pending resolution of related employer and sale of business applications.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board convened a hearing regarding multiple applications under sections 1(4) and 69 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and related unfair labour practice complaints.
On consent of the parties, the Board adjourned a related construction industry grievance referral until the related employer and sale of business applications are disposed of.
The Board also amended the style of cause to reflect a union name change, issued an oral production order, and set further hearing dates.
Employer's late appeal of an Order to Pay dismissed; extension of time denied.
The employer appealed an Order to Pay for unpaid wages well outside the statutory 45-day time limit and sought an extension.
The employer argued that it believed a settlement had been reached with the employee and cited difficulties running a small business.
The Board found that the employer failed to follow the appeal instructions on the Order and that the alleged settlement was never finalized.
Balancing the employer's struggles against the employee's prolonged wait for unpaid wages, the Board declined to extend the time limit and dismissed the appeal as untimely.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board at the applicant's request.
The applicant requested to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave.
Prima facie case of arbitrary union conduct established; applicant directed to file particulars.
The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act alleging the union breached its duty of fair representation regarding his loss of employment.
The union and employer sought dismissal for delay and failure to make out a prima facie case.
The Board found that the applicant's allegations—that the union completely ignored his concerns regarding bumping rights and a severance package—made out a prima facie case of arbitrary conduct.
The Board directed the applicant to file particulars detailing what the union ought to have done.
Board issued a consent order settling a construction industry grievance for $2,330.26 in damages.
The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement acknowledging that the responding party was bound by the collective agreement and had violated it.
The Board issued a consent order incorporating the settlement terms, including declarations of the violations and an order for the responding party to pay $2,330.26 in damages.
Board requests submissions on the impact of pending Bill 139 on a non-construction employer application.
The applicant sought a determination that it is a 'non-construction employer' under section 127.2 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
While the Board was deliberating, the Government tabled Bill 139, which proposed to amend the definition of 'non-construction employer'.
Anticipating the imminent passage of Bill 139, the Board directed the parties to provide submissions on the impact of the anticipated legislative change on the proceedings and whether it made labour relations sense to release a decision.
The Board issued a correction to a previous decision regarding the cessation of a collective agreement.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision to correct a typographical error in paragraph 53 of its previous decision dated December 13, 2000.
The correction clarified that as of October 16, 2000, any collective agreement in the construction industry binding the Bank and the applicant ceases to apply.
Board ordered sealed ballots counted in representation vote despite pending unfair labour practice allegations.
In an application for certification, a representation vote was held and the ballot box was sealed due to an employee's allegations that the employer required her to sign a union membership card as a condition of employment.
The applicant, employer, and an intervening union all requested that the ballots be counted, suggesting it might bring the matter to a speedy end.
The Board directed that the ballots be counted to advance the matter and shorten the period of workplace disruption.
Union certification granted following successful representation votes in two agreed-upon bargaining units.
The applicant union applied for certification.
Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent of the ballots in each of the two agreed-upon bargaining units were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that certificates issue to the applicant.
Request for reconsideration dismissed; out-of-province workers ineligible to vote in certification application.
The responding party employer requested reconsideration of a Board decision that excluded roofers working in Quebec on the application date from the voting constituency in a certification application.
The employer argued the Board failed to distinguish between the bargaining unit description and the voting constituency.
The Board dismissed the request, finding that determining whether a person was working within the geographical scope of the application is an aspect of deciding whether they were at work in the bargaining unit on the application date, and the employer failed to establish grounds for reconsideration.
Board postponed consideration of subsequent certification applications pending final decision on the original application.
Two unions filed subsequent applications for certification to represent the same employees who were already subject to an earlier certification application by another union.
A representation vote had already been taken.
Pursuant to section 111(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board exercised its discretion to postpone consideration of the subsequent applications until a final decision was issued on the original application.