Rene R. Montague

The applicant union sought interim orders under section 92.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to prevent the responding employer from implementing its final offer or recalling employees pending the disposition of an unfair labour practice complaint.

The union alleged that the employer's pre-vote conduct, including threats of plant closure and offers of cash payments, tainted a section 42 final offer vote.

The Board found an arguable case but dismissed the application, concluding that the balance of harm favoured the employer, who was suffering significant financial losses, over the union.

In an application for certification, the applicant trade union requested advance disclosure of the employer's Employee List prior to the scheduled meeting with a Labour Relations Officer.

The employer agreed to provide the list only if the union provided its Form 9 declaration concerning membership documents in return.

The Board declined to order immediate advance disclosure, holding that its current 'Waiver' process—whereby the list is provided to the union by a Waiver Officer after the parties' positions on the bargaining unit description are identified—adequately balances the union's need for preparation time with the employer's concerns about tactical advantages and gerrymandering.

Separate concurring and dissenting opinions were issued by the Board Members.

The union applied for a direction to settle a first collective agreement by arbitration under section 40a of the Labour Relations Act.

The union argued that the employer failed to make reasonable or expeditious efforts to conclude an agreement and adopted uncompromising bargaining positions without reasonable justification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the employer's bargaining approach, which included a massive volume of proposals, concessionary demands, and a confusing format, amounted to 'busy work' bargaining that hindered progress.

Furthermore, the employer's final offer was uncompromising and its financial justification was incomplete and unpersuasive.

The Board directed the settlement of the first contract by arbitration.

A partial dissent was filed regarding a preliminary ruling on the late filing of the employer's reply.

The applicant union applied for a direction that a first collective agreement be settled by arbitration under section 40a of the Labour Relations Act.

The union alleged that the respondent private school failed to make reasonable or expeditious efforts to conclude an agreement and adopted uncompromising bargaining positions without reasonable justification regarding management rights, seniority, and layoffs.

The Board found that while the bargaining process was unsuccessful, the respondent had reasonable justification for its positions, given its financial deficit, declining enrolment, and the need to remain competitive with other private schools.

The application was dismissed, with one Board member dissenting.