Duty of fair representation complaint dismissed for failing to plead a prima facie case.
The applicant filed a complaint alleging that her union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The applicant had been suspended and subsequently signed a release in exchange for eight weeks of termination pay, which was witnessed by a union representative.
The Board dismissed the application without a hearing for failing to make out a prima facie case, noting that the applicant made no specific allegations regarding the union's conduct and that the Board does not have jurisdiction to inquire into general allegations of employer unfairness where a valid release has been signed.
Applications withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant union sought to withdraw its applications against the City of Toronto and the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the applications were withdrawn.
Board schedules hearing and appoints Labour Relations Officer for unfair labour practice application regarding vacation pay during strike.
The applicant union filed an unfair labour practice application alleging the employer's decisions regarding vacation scheduling and pay during a lawful strike violated the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The union sought an expedited hearing, which the employer opposed.
The Board agreed some expedition was required but allowed the employer time to file a response and appointed a Labour Relations Officer to attempt settlement before the scheduled hearing.
Employer's request to dismiss duty of fair representation complaint for delay and changed circumstances denied.
The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against the union.
The matter was heard in 1998, but the Vice-Chair failed to produce a decision and returned the file.
The Board scheduled a consultation to rehear the matter.
The intervenor employer requested that the application be dismissed for failure to make out a prima facie case, citing the delay and changed circumstances, including the applicant's retirement.
The Board declined to reconsider its previous determination that a prima facie case had been made out, noting that changed circumstances might aid settlement but do not affect the prima facie case.
Default judgment granted against employer for unpaid union dues and benefits remittances.
The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding employer failed to make timely remittances for benefits and dues.
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 Board deemed the responding party to have accepted all facts stated in the application.
The Board found the responding party violated the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $572.59 in unpaid remittances and $214.00 in filing costs.
Employer ordered to pay $26,477.23 for terminating employee three days after she announced her pregnancy.
The applicant appealed an Officer's decision not to issue an Order to Pay, alleging she was terminated because she announced her pregnancy and intention to take a leave, contrary to section 44 of the Employment Standards Act.
The employer claimed she was terminated due to financial difficulties and performance issues, but the decision-maker found the employer failed to meet the heavy burden of proving the termination was unrelated to the pregnancy, given the timing of the dismissal just three days after the announcement.
The Board ordered the employer to pay $26,477.23 in damages for loss of wages, loss of reasonable expectation of continued employment, and pain and suffering.
Unfair labour practice complaints against rival union dismissed for failing to establish a prima facie case.
The applicant union sought reconsideration of a decision dismissing its unfair labour practice complaints and request for consent to prosecute a rival union.
The applicant alleged the rival union breached sections 73(2) and 76 of the Labour Relations Act by attempting to negotiate a grievance resolution and engaging in a pattern of conduct designed to undermine the applicant.
The Board held that section 73(2) only prohibits negotiating a collective agreement, not grievance resolutions.
The Board also found the allegations did not amount to intimidation or coercion under section 76, noting a trade union is not a 'person' capable of seeking such a remedy.
The applications were dismissed for failing to make out a prima facie case.
Request for reconsideration dismissed as untimely and lacking valid grounds.
The applicant requested reconsideration of an April 25, 2000 decision that dismissed his application as untimely.
The Board found that the reconsideration request itself was filed outside the 20-day time limit under Rule 96 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.
Furthermore, the applicant provided no valid reasons for reconsideration, merely disagreeing with the Board's factual findings.
The request for reconsideration was dismissed.
Employment standards review application resolved and funds disbursed pursuant to Minutes of Settlement.
The applicant employer applied for 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 $441.17 paid to the employee and a $100.00 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.
The applicant, International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793, sought to withdraw its application against the responding party, Clement Utility Contractors Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Employment Standards Act application terminated following parties' execution of Minutes of Settlement.
The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement resolving all issues in dispute.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board terminated the application in accordance with subsection 69.1(5) of the Employment Standards Act.
The applicant sought to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The Board granted leave to withdraw the application.
Employer ordered to pay $55,104 for employing non-union workers after failing to respond to grievance.
The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer breached the collective agreement by employing non-union workers.
The responding party failed to file a response or 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 employer breached the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $55,104.00 in damages and $214.00 in costs.
Default judgment granted against employer for unpaid benefit contributions and union dues.
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 remit benefit contributions and union dues.
The responding party failed to file a response.
Pursuant to the Board's Rules of Procedure, the responding party was deemed to have accepted the facts stated in the application.
The Board found the responding party violated the collective agreement and ordered it to pay $3,450.00 in unpaid remittances, plus $214.00 in statutory costs.
Board directs written submissions on validity of intervenor's voluntary recognition agreement following successful representation vote.
The applicant union applied for certification in the construction industry.
A representation vote was held and the applicant was successful.
The intervenor union alleged it had bargaining rights through a voluntary recognition agreement executed six days prior to the application.
The Board directed the parties to file written submissions regarding the validity of the intervenor's voluntary recognition agreement, noting the issue may be resolved without an oral hearing.
Senior officers and directors are not excluded from claiming unpaid wages from directors under the ESA.
The directors of an insolvent corporation appealed an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act, arguing that two senior officers (one of whom was also a director) should not be entitled to recover unpaid wages from the directors because of their senior positions and knowledge of the company's financial situation.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the appeal, finding that the plain language of the Act does not exclude senior officers or directors from claiming unpaid wages from the directors of an insolvent corporation.
Directors' appeal not terminated despite expired adjournment period due to Board's administrative error.
The applicants appealed an Order to Pay.
The matter was previously adjourned sine die on the condition that it would be terminated in one year if no party sought to bring it on for hearing.
The applicants' counsel requested an extension before the deadline, but the Board lost the letter.
The Board found no prejudice to the affected employees, who had been paid out of the Employee Wage Protection Fund.
The Board determined it was not appropriate to consider the matter terminated and set a hearing date.
Board directed notice to affected employees in related employer application where respondents failed to reply.
The applicant unions filed an application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The responding employers failed to file responses.
The Board directed that notice of the application be provided to affected employees based on remittance records, giving them 10 days to express interest in participating.
The Board also noted that an oral hearing might not be necessary given the lack of responses.
Board directs three related labour applications to be listed together for hearing.
The applicant union requested that an application for certification, a related employer application, and a grievance be listed together for hearing.
The intervenor union agreed the matters were intrinsically linked.
The Board directed that all three applications be listed together for hearing, leaving the determination of how they should proceed to the panel hearing the matters.
Application for review terminated after employer failed to file the required forms.
The employer sought to review an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act and submitted a partial payment in trust.
The Board notified the employer that the application was not filed on the correct forms and granted a 20-day extension to comply.
The employer failed to file the proper forms within the extended time limit.
The Board terminated the matter and directed the Director to pay out the trust monies to the employee.