Retailer declared a non-construction employer as its construction activities were incidental to its primary business.
The applicant, a national clothing retailer, applied under section 127.2 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it is a 'non-construction employer'.
The applicant regularly engaged general contractors to renovate and build its retail stores but had not directly employed construction workers for nearly two decades.
The Board applied the two-part test for a non-construction employer, finding that the applicant employed no construction employees on the application date and that its engagement in the construction industry was merely incidental to its primary business of retail.
The Board concluded the applicant met the statutory pre-conditions for the declaration, but deferred the final order pending a hearing on the responding party's Charter challenge.
Application for certification dismissed as untimely due to a valid pre-hire voluntary recognition agreement.
The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America applied for certification to represent carpenters employed by Intracorp Developments Ltd. Intracorp and the intervenor, Local 183, argued the application was barred by a voluntary recognition agreement they had previously signed.
The Carpenters alleged the agreement was invalid because Intracorp had employees in the bargaining unit at the time who were not represented by Local 183, claiming that labourers supplied by a personnel agency (CPS) were actually Intracorp employees.
The Board applied the York Condominium factors and found that CPS, not Intracorp, was the true employer.
Consequently, there were no employees in the bargaining unit when the agreement was signed, making it a valid pre-hire agreement under the Nicholls-Radtke exception.
The application for certification was dismissed as untimely.
Order to Pay revoked as untimely because it was issued more than two years after the initial complaint.
The employer applied for a review of an Officer's Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act regarding unpaid overtime and holiday pay for its drivers.
The employer raised a preliminary issue that the Order to Pay was untimely because it was issued more than two years after the facts upon which the proceeding was based first came to the knowledge of the Director.
The Board found that the initial complaint filed by an employee identified the employer, the group of affected employees, and the systemic issue of non-payment of overtime.
Therefore, the facts came to the Director's knowledge at the time of the initial complaint.
Because the Order to Pay was issued more than two years after this date, it was untimely.
The Board revoked the Order to Pay.
Board declines to adjourn hearing of constitutional issues.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to adjourn the hearing of constitutional issues after reviewing the submissions of counsel.
Application for review of an Order to Pay resolved via 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 Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $700 paid to the employee, $340 returned to the employer, and the $104 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
OLRB orders disbursement of funds held in trust pursuant to parties' settlement of Employment Standards Act dispute.
The applicant employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.
The Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed according to the settlement, with $1,828.20 returned to the employer, $1,200.00 paid to the employee, and the administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
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 to withdraw the application.
Employment standards application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant requested to withdraw her employment standards application against the responding parties.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.
The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
The applicant sought to withdraw her employment standards application against the responding parties.
Employment Standards Act appeal resolved via Minutes of Settlement with funds disbursed accordingly.
The applicant employer appealed an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.
The Board ordered the funds held in trust to be disbursed according to the settlement, with $150 to the employer, $150 to the employee, and the $100 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
The matter was deemed terminated subject to any request by the Ministry of Labour to relist it.
Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant sought to withdraw two applications before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The Board granted leave and the applications were withdrawn.
Only employees actively at work in the bargaining unit on the application date are eligible to vote.
In an application for certification in the construction industry, the parties disagreed on voter eligibility.
The employer argued that employees not at work on the application date and employees working in Quebec on the application date should be eligible to vote.
The Board rejected the employer's arguments, applying its longstanding 'bright line' test that only employees actively at work in the bargaining unit on the application date are eligible to vote.
The Board noted that the statutory scheme for provincial bargaining in the ICI sector precludes a bargaining unit encompassing employees working in Quebec.
The matter was referred to the Registrar to count the ballots of the eligible voters.
Time extended for director's appeal of Order to Pay due to confusing filing instructions.
The applicant director filed an appeal of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act four days past the 45-day time limit.
The delay occurred because the application and trust monies were delivered to the Director of Employment Standards instead of the Board, due to unclear instructions in the Board's information bulletin.
The Board found it appropriate to extend the time under section 68(4) of the Act, rendering the application timely.
Time extended for review application where failure to pay administration costs was a clerical error.
The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.
The applicant remitted the amount of the Order to Pay but failed to pay the statutory administration costs due to a clerical error.
Upon being notified, the applicant quickly rectified the error and requested an extension of time to apply.
The Board found it appropriate to extend the time for applying, rendering the application timely.
Application for review of Order to Pay dismissed for failure to pay full amount into trust.
The applicant failed to pay the full amount of the Order to Pay to the Director in trust, deducting an amount it claimed was for statutory deductions or due to a calculation error by the Employment Standards Officer.
The Board directed the applicant to either pay the difference or provide a breakdown of the statutory deductions.
The applicant's explanation did not account for the difference.
The Board dismissed the application for failing to comply with the requirement under section 68(7) of the Act to pay the full amount of the Order to Pay before an application for review can be made.
Bank declared a non-construction employer; related employer applications dismissed.
The Toronto-Dominion Bank applied for a declaration that it is a non-construction employer under section 127.2 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The Carpenters District Council applied for related employer declarations under section 1(4) of the Act between the Bank and several construction companies.
In a bottom-line decision, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared the Bank a non-construction employer, subject to a pending constitutional challenge.
The Board dismissed the related employer applications, finding no common control or direction.
Time to file application for review extended due to brief delay and confusion over employer's closure.
The applicant filed an application for review of an Officer's decision not to issue an Order to Pay approximately three weeks after the 45-day deadline under section 68(3) of the Employment Standards Act.
The applicant requested an extension of time, citing confusion and uncertainty surrounding the sale and closure of his employer.
The Board granted the extension, finding it appropriate given the reasons offered and the relatively brief period of delay.
Board issues consent declarations of sale of business and common employer based on settlement.
The applicant union filed applications alleging a sale of business and common employer status, along with an unfair labour practice complaint and a construction industry grievance.
The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement resolving all issues.
The Board issued declarations on consent that a sale of business occurred and that the responding parties constitute a single employer, binding them to the collective agreement.
Appeal proceedings terminated after applicant failed to file required forms and information.
The applicant sought to appeal an Inspector's Order and requested a suspension of the order pending the appeal.
The Board informed the applicant that its request did not comply with the Rules of Procedure and directed it to submit the required forms and information within 15 days.
The applicant failed to do so, and the Board terminated the proceedings.