Board recorded agreement on voter eligibility and adjourned unfair labour practice hearing with posting directions.
The Board heard a displacement application for certification and an unfair labour practice complaint in the construction industry.
The parties reached an agreement that three specific individuals were not entitled to vote as they were not at work on the application date.
Due to scheduling conflicts, the hearing for the remaining unfair labour practice complaint was adjourned to March 2002.
The Board directed the employer to post a notice reminding employees of their rights under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, pending the continuation of the hearing.
Board strikes union's section 76 complaint and apology request but finds prima facie case for other unfair labour practice allegations.
During fractious collective bargaining, the parties filed multiple unfair labour practice complaints against each other.
The employer brought a motion to dismiss the union's complaint for failing to make out a prima facie case.
The Board dismissed the union's section 76 complaint because a trade union is not a 'person' under the Act, and struck the request for a public apology as the Board does not order such remedies.
However, the Board found the union made out a prima facie case for breaches of sections 17, 70, and 72.
The Board scheduled all three complaints to be heard together and urged the parties to focus on bargaining.
Employer's review dismissed; poor performance did not amount to wilful misconduct exempting termination pay.
The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay termination and severance pay to a former employee, a certified technician.
The employer argued it was exempt from paying under the Employment Standards Act because the employee was guilty of wilful misconduct, citing several incidents of poor and unsafe work.
The Board found that while the employee's performance was unsatisfactory and justified termination, his mistakes were not intentional or deliberate.
Therefore, the conduct did not amount to wilful misconduct, and the Order to Pay was affirmed.
Duty of fair representation complaint partially dismissed; arguable case found regarding insufficient notice of arbitration hearing.
The applicant filed a complaint alleging the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The union and employer requested the application be dismissed for failing to plead a prima facie case.
The Board dismissed the portion of the complaint relating to the union's failure to strictly follow grievance timeframes, finding no arguable breach.
However, the Board found the applicant pleaded a prima facie case regarding the union's alleged failure to provide sufficient notice of an arbitration hearing, which proceeded in his absence and resulted in a settlement.
The matter was directed to be scheduled for consultation on that single issue.
Applications adjourned sine die on consent for up to one year.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted a consent request to adjourn two applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.
If neither party requests to proceed within that time, the applications will be deemed terminated without further notice.
Motion to dismiss for delay denied; pre-amendment definition of non-construction employer applies to earlier application.
The applicant employer filed two applications seeking a declaration that it is a 'non-construction employer' under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The first application was filed before legislative amendments changed the definition of 'non-construction employer', while the second was filed after.
The responding union brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the first application for delay and argued that the new definition should apply.
The Board dismissed the motion, finding no prejudice to the union from the delay, and held that the first application would be determined under the pre-amendment definition because the applicant's substantive rights were affected and the proceeding was commenced under the old legislation.
Union's bargaining rights terminated following representation vote; grievance referral hearing deferred pending clarification.
The applicant filed a termination application seeking to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding union.
Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and the union failing to particularize its allegations of employer interference under section 63(13) of the Act, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.
The Board also declined to schedule the union's grievance referral for hearing until the union clarified its intentions regarding a related employer application under section 1(4) of the Act.
Board implements uncontested settlement, directing payout of funds to employees and employer.
The applicant employer and a number of affected employees entered into Minutes of Settlement regarding an employment standards matter.
After a 21-day objection period passed with no objections received from employees, the Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the implementation of the settlement.
The Director of Employment Standards was ordered to pay $4,364.39 to the employees and remit the remaining $13,093.16 to the employer.
Applications adjourned sine die for up to one year 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 without further notice if neither party requests to proceed.
Remaining certification issues and related unfair labour practice complaint directed to be heard together by new panel.
The applicant union applied for certification for a bargaining unit of paramedics.
A dispute arose regarding whether a voluntary recognition agreement between the responding party employer and an intervenor union barred the application.
The applicant also filed an unfair labour practice complaint regarding the same agreement.
After the original Vice Chair recused herself, the Alternate Chair directed that a new panel of the Board would hear and decide the remaining issues in the certification application together with the unfair labour practice complaint.
The Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local One brought applications against Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission and related entities.
On the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.
Adjournment granted for religious holiday despite lack of consent from opposing party.
The Board scheduled a consultation for September 18, 2001.
The responding union and the intervenor employer requested an adjournment because the date fell on a Jewish holiday.
The applicant did not consent.
The Board clarified that its general practice requiring consent for adjournments does not apply to requests based on religious observance.
The Board apologized for its initial handling of the request and adjourned the consultation to October 10, 2001.
Application adjourned sine die on consent of the parties.
The parties agreed to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.
The Board consented to the adjournment, noting that the matter would be deemed terminated if no party requested to proceed within that time.
Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed due to employer initiation.
The applicant, the sole employee in the bargaining unit, applied to terminate the responding party's bargaining rights.
The union alleged that the application was initiated by the employer.
The employer chose not to participate in the hearing.
The Board deemed the union's allegations of employer initiation to be true as against the employer.
Finding that the employer instigated the application by contacting a rival union and facilitating the applicant's involvement, the Board dismissed the application pursuant to section 63(16) of the Labour Relations Act.
Board directs counting of agreed-upon ballots in application to terminate bargaining rights.
The applicant filed an application to terminate bargaining rights in the ICI sector of the construction industry.
The union abandoned its challenges to three voters but maintained its challenge to a fourth.
The applicant agreed to drop the fourth voter from the list for the purpose of counting the ballots.
The Board directed the counting of the three agreed-upon ballots and scheduled a hearing to address the union's allegations that the employer initiated the application contrary to section 63(16) of the Act.
Tribunal directed written submissions on whether the issue of employer identity was raised at Review Services.
The applicant requested a hearing regarding a Review Officer's order that it was obliged to comply with the Pay Equity Act and adjust the respondent's job rate.
The applicant argued that Russel Metals Inc. was the true employer following a sale of business.
Russel Metals Inc. argued that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to consider the employer identity issue because it was not raised before the Review Officer.
The Tribunal directed the parties to provide written submissions on whether the issue of the employer's identity was raised at Review Services before proceeding further.
The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.
The Board ordered the adjournment, noting that the matters would be deemed terminated if no party requested to proceed within that time.
Tribunal directed parties to file written submissions on the Pay Equity Office's standing to participate.
The Tribunal previously dismissed parts of the employer's application relating to complaints about a Review Officer's conduct, leaving only a substantive workplace dispute about pay equity adjustments.
The Pay Equity Office filed a response seeking to participate in the hearing.
The Tribunal directed the parties to file written submissions regarding the Office's standing to participate in the proceeding before convening the hearing.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment, noting that the matters would be deemed terminated if no party requested to proceed within that time.
Application for review of an Officer's determination withdrawn by the applicant.
The applicant requested to withdraw her complaint under the Employment Standards Act.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application for review of an Officer's determination.