Representation vote directed in certification application with ballot box sealed pending bargaining unit dispute resolution.
The applicant trade union applied for certification.
The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and proposed a different unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with the ballot box sealed pending resolution of the bargaining unit dispute.
Individuals in disputed logging and road building positions were permitted to cast segregated ballots.
Representation vote directed in union certification application despite employer's dispute over bargaining unit composition.
The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.
The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and proposed a different bargaining unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The Board found the applicant's proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate and that the numerical difference between the parties was not significant.
The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with disputed clerical positions casting segregated ballots.
Representation vote ordered in certification application for municipal employees.
The applicant trade union filed an application for certification to represent employees of the responding party municipality.
The Ontario Labour Relations 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 at the time the application was made.
The Board ordered a representation vote to be taken among the eligible employees in the voting constituency, with a direction to segregate the ballot of any individual holding the disputed position of water/sewage superintendent.
Application adjourned sine die on consent for up to one year.
The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed.
Construction industry grievance referral adjourned sine die pending resolution of related single employer application.
The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The grievance was related to another application seeking a single employer and sale of business declaration.
The Board adjourned the grievance referral sine die for up to one year, pending the resolution of the related application.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant requested to withdraw its application.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
Board sets strict deadlines for union's constitutional challenge to prevent delay of non-construction employer declaration.
The applicant was previously found to meet the preconditions for a 'non-construction employer' declaration under s. 127.2 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The responding party filed a Notice of Constitutional Question.
The applicant raised concerns that the constitutional argument was being used merely to delay the issuance of remedial orders and requested an expedited procedure.
The Board directed the responding party to file fulsome submissions on its constitutional argument by a strict deadline, failing which the Board would issue the remedial orders.
Applications for single employer and sale of business declarations adjourned sine die on consent.
The applicants brought applications alleging that the responding parties should be declared a single employer for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, or that there had been a sale of business.
On the first day of hearing, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Agreement regarding document production and agreed to consult before requesting new dates.
The Board adjourned the matters sine die for a period not exceeding one year.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board on agreement of the parties.
The applicants, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 772 and Robert Walter Hogan, sought to withdraw their application against DSM Engineering Plastics Ltd. Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
The applicant requested to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
Certificates issued to trade union following successful representation vote in construction industry application.
The applicant trade union applied for certification in the construction industry.
Following a representation vote where more than 50 per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire filed, the Board ordered the issuance of certificates pursuant to section 160(1) of the Act.
The responding party's request for reconsideration of a prior decision regarding voter eligibility remained pending.
Time for responding party to file response extended to December 8, 2000.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a procedural decision extending the time for the responding parties to deliver and file their response to December 8, 2000.
Responding party directed to file submissions regarding applicant's letter by November 27, 2000.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed counsel for the responding party to deliver and file submissions in respect of the applicant's letter dated November 20, 2000, by no later than November 27, 2000.
Board orders disbursement of funds held in trust in accordance with parties' Minutes of Settlement.
The applicant employer sought a review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.
The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.
The Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $650.00 paid to the employee, $220.84 returned to the employer, and $112.84 retained as an administration fee.
The matter was deemed terminated absent a request from the Ministry of Labour to relist it for hearing.
Application dismissed due to the applicant's failure to attend the scheduled hearing.
The applicant appealed an employment standards officer's decision finding no employment relationship with the responding party.
On the scheduled hearing date, neither the applicant nor the responding party attended.
After waiting 30 minutes, the Board dismissed the application for failure to attend.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board following Minutes of Settlement.
The applicant sought to withdraw her application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board following the execution of Minutes of Settlement.
Board issues consent order declaring sale of business and defining food services bargaining unit.
The applicant union filed an application under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act regarding the sale of a business.
Prior to the hearing, the parties signed a memorandum of settlement agreeing that a sale of a business had occurred from Les Soeurs de la Charité d’Ottawa to ARAMARK Canada Ltd. The Board issued a consent order declaring the sale and defining the bargaining unit for food services employees.
The applicant, United Steelworkers of America, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, CPI Plastics Group Ltd. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Board finds applicants pleaded a prima facie case of a breach of the duty of fair representation.
The applicants filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that the responding union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74.
The union argued that the applicants failed to make out a prima facie case.
The Board reviewed the application and concluded that the applicants had pleaded a prima facie case.
Board orders counting of undisputed ballots in certification vote to clarify litigation positions.
In an application for certification in the construction industry, the Board directed a vote with segregated ballots.
The intervenor conceded all but one challenge to voter eligibility but argued the ballots should not be counted until the final challenge was resolved.
The Board ordered the undisputed ballots to be counted to bring clarity to the parties' litigation positions.
The Board declined to make an advance production order regarding the intervenor's voluntary recognition agreement, noting that Rule 36 of the Board's Rules of Procedure already addressed the issue.