R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 22, 1985

Occasional teachers in French language schools constitute an appropriate bargaining unit for certification.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit consisting of occasional teachers employed in the respondent's six French language secondary schools.

The respondent argued that the unit should include all occasional teachers across all its secondary schools to avoid fragmentation.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board determined that the occasional teachers in the French language schools shared a distinct and definable community of interest, making the proposed subdivision an appropriate bargaining unit.

A Board Officer was appointed to inquire into the employee list to determine the exact composition of the bargaining unit.

L'Association des Enseignantes et Enseignants Suppleants v. Le Conseil Scolaire d'Ottawa, 1985 CanLII 1006

Paul S. Jarvis

10 cases1982–2009

Malcolm Boyle

John Tomlinson

2 cases1985–1988

Jack Porter

3 cases1981–1985

Alexander Ahee

2 cases1985–2000

W. H. Wightman

S. O'Flvnn

OLRB0 cases1985–1985

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 27, 1985

Employer cannot unilaterally withhold final wages to set off a previous overpayment without court authorization.

The grievor voluntarily terminated his employment, at which time the employer withheld his final wages of $756.96 to set off a $7,060 overpayment of room and board allowance mistakenly paid to him.

The union grieved the withholding of wages.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that section 8 of the Employment Standards Act strictly prohibits an employer from unilaterally setting off or deducting amounts from an employee's wages to satisfy a claim, requiring the employer to seek its remedy in court.

The Board directed the employer to pay the withheld wages plus interest.

The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada v. The Electrical Power Systems Construction Association, 1985 CanLII 987

Thane Woodside

3 cases1985–2002

Sharryn Aiken

Jim Hasseli

David Starkman

10 cases1983–1987

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 22, 1985

Board orders union to cease picketing that encouraged an unlawful strike, rejecting Charter freedom of expression defence.

The applicant employer sought a cease and desist order against the respondent union and its official for establishing a picket line at a construction site over a jurisdictional dispute.

The applicant argued the picketing was intended to induce an unlawful sympathy strike by other trades.

The respondents claimed the picketing was informational and protected by the freedom of expression guarantee under the Charter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the picketing was a call to action intended to cause an unlawful strike, which is not protected by the Charter.

The Board issued declarations and directions ordering the respondents to cease and desist from picketing and encouraging an unlawful strike.

Horton CBI, Limited v. International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers Local 759, 1985 CanLII 985

Mary Cornish

53 cases1981–2022

D. F. O. Hersey, Q. C.

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 14, 1985

R. J. Gallivan

OLRB0 cases1985–1988

P. Grasso

OLRB0 cases1984–1993

Union did not breach duty of fair representation by refusing to fund member's judicial review counsel.

The complainant alleged that her union breached its duty of fair representation under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act by refusing to actively participate in or fund her independent legal counsel for a judicial review application brought by her employer.

The employer was seeking to quash a previous Board decision that had found both the employer and the union in breach of the Act.

The Board dismissed the complaint, finding that the union's decision was based on the advice of legal counsel and was not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.

The union was not obligated to underwrite the complainant's legal costs for the judicial review.

Anisia Mordowanec v. Ontario Nurses Association (ONA), 1985 CanLII 979

Mary Cornish

53 cases1981–2022

Leonard P. Kavanaugh, Q.C.

4 cases1984–1986

Donald F. 0. Hersey, Q. C.

Dan Anderson

5 cases1982–1991

A. J. Lopes

2 cases1984–1985

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 13, 1985

R. J. Gallivan

OLRB0 cases1985–1988

P. Grasso

OLRB0 cases1984–1993

Minister has authority under section 44(4) to appoint employer nominee to arbitration board directed by OLRB.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 107 of the Labour Relations Act regarding his authority to appoint an employer nominee to a board of arbitration under section 44(4).

The arbitration was previously directed by the Board as a remedy for unfair labour practices committed by both the employer and the union, which had resulted in the complainant's termination.

The employer refused to appoint a nominee, arguing that it had applied for judicial review and that the arbitration was not pursuant to the collective agreement.

The Board advised the Minister that the arbitration process contemplated by its remedial order is a process under the collective agreement to which section 44(4) applies, and therefore the Minister has the legal authority to appoint the employer nominee.

Windsor Western Hospital (Riverview Unit) v. Ontario Nurses' Association, 1985 CanLII 991

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 31, 1985

I. M. Stamp

OLRB0 cases1982–1988

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Board determines bargaining unit composition, excluding a heavy equipment operator but including a working foreman.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of construction labourers.

The employer disputed the inclusion of two employees.

The Board found that one employee, who primarily operated heavy equipment, belonged in an operating engineers' unit and was excluded.

The Board found that the second employee, a foreman, did not exercise managerial functions within the meaning of section 1(3)(b) of the Labour Relations Act and was properly included in the bargaining unit.

Labourers' International Union of North America, Local 183 v. Di Marco Plumbing and Heating Company Limited, 1985 CanLII 956

Mark Contini

25 cases1981–2023

W. H. Wightman

W.F. Rutherford

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 28, 1985

Declaration of successor rights granted to union following valid merger vote despite employee objections.

The applicant union, CUPE, applied for a declaration under section 62 of the Labour Relations Act that it had acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor union, the Bethesda Service Employees Association, following a merger vote.

The employer took a neutral position, but a group of employees objected, suggesting some employees had second thoughts after the vote.

The Board found that the merger vote was well-attended and properly conducted, and that the employees' concerns did not warrant refusing the declaration or directing a new representation vote.

The Board granted the declaration of successor rights.

Canadian Union of Public Employees v. Bethesda Service Employees Association, 1985 CanLII 954

Maurice A. Green

34 cases1980–2009

Chris G. Paliare

192 cases1980–2026

B. H. Stewart, Q.C.

S. Cooke

OLRB0 cases1981–2025

R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 6, 1985

OSSTF found to be a trade union despite managerial members; new bargaining unit test established for occasional teachers.

The Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF) applied for certification to represent occasional teachers employed by the respondent board of education.

The respondent and the intervener union argued that OSSTF was not a trade union under the Labour Relations Act because its membership included principals and vice-principals who exercised managerial functions.

The Board held that OSSTF is a trade union, finding that the inclusion of managerial members does not disqualify an organization from being a trade union, especially given the statutory inclusion of principals in teacher bargaining units under other legislation.

The Board also established a new test for determining the composition of the bargaining unit for occasional teachers, rejecting the traditional 30/30-day rule in favour of a broader test including those actively at work on the application date or who had worked at least one day in the preceding twelve months.

Finally, the Board directed the employer to provide a list of employee names and addresses to facilitate a fair representation vote.

Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation v. The Board of Education for the City of York, 1985 CanLII 978

Martin Levinson

15 cases1980–1987

Bruce Binning

40 cases1981–1998

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 25, 1985

Board refused to prohibit picketing at construction gate during lawful lockout as it was connected to the dispute.

The applicant construction contractors sought a direction from the Ontario Labour Relations Board to prohibit members of the respondent union from picketing a construction gate at a brewery where the union's members were lawfully locked out.

The picketing caused the applicants' unionized construction employees to refuse to cross the picket line, resulting in an unlawful strike.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the picketing was 'in connection with' a lawful lockout within the meaning of section 76(2) of the Labour Relations Act, as the construction work was directly related to the primary employer's automation program, which was the central issue in the labour dispute.

Bird Construction Company Limited et al. v. Canadian Union of United Brewery, Flour, Cereal, Soft Drink and Distillery Workers — C.L.C. Local 325 Etobicoke et al., 1985 CanLII 917

R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 8, 1985

B. L. Armstrong

OLRB0 cases1980–1997

Application for unlawful lockout declaration dismissed because individual employees lack standing under the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant, an individual employee, filed an application for a declaration of an unlawful lockout against the respondent employer, alleging he was locked out after being absent due to a workplace injury.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application without a hearing.

The Board held that under section 93 of the Labour Relations Act, an individual does not have standing to apply for a declaration of an unlawful lockout.

Furthermore, the Board found that the applicant's allegations related to a discharge rather than a lockout as defined in the Act, and thus failed to make out a prima facie case.

Robert Williams v. Monarch Fine Foods Company Limited, 1985 CanLII 926

R. Rosenblatt, Q. C.

J. Paul Wearing

16 cases1984–2016

R. O. MacDowell

J. Wilson

OLRB0 cases1981–1987

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 6, 1985

Sublease of former grocery store premises to a new operator did not constitute a sale of business.

The applicant union alleged that the respondent company's acquisition of a sublease and certain equipment from a former Safeway store constituted a sale of a business under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent company, which operated ethnically-oriented supermarkets, argued it merely acquired the right to use the premises to expand its own existing business.

The Board found that the respondent did not acquire Safeway's business, but rather purchased idle assets to expand its own successful going concern that catered to a different market.

The application was dismissed.

United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 206 v. Keele-Wilson Supermarket Limited, 1985 CanLII 923

L. Arnold

6 cases1981–2000

G. Grossman

32 cases1980–1987

B. Fishbien

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 28, 1985

B. L. Armstrong

OLRB0 cases1980–1997

A. Grant

OLRB0 cases1983–1987

Grievance dismissed; collective agreement did not require employer to hire exclusively through union referral system.

The applicant union filed a grievance alleging the respondent company violated the union security provisions of the collective agreement by hiring two union members directly rather than through a union referral system.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the collective agreement did not require the company to hire exclusively through the union or mandate a referral slip system.

Furthermore, the Board found that no functioning hiring hall or out-of-work list actually existed in the area at the time.

The company's direct hiring of the union members was consistent with established area practice and did not breach the agreement.

Lumber and Sawmill Workers' Union, Local 2693 v. Bird Construction Company Limited, 1985 CanLII 888

Stephen Bale

3 cases1985–2012

W. H. Wightman

S. O'Flynn

OLRB0 cases1985–1988

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 25, 1985

Complaint for late settlement payment dismissed as the delay was minor and interest trivial.

The complainant alleged a breach of a settlement agreement because the respondent paid a $1,750 settlement amount approximately one week late.

The respondent had offered to pay the four or five dollars in interest for the delay, but the complainant refused, demanding a Board order as a matter of principle.

The Board exercised its discretion under section 89 of the Labour Relations Act to decline to make an order, noting the delay was not excessive and the amount in issue was trivial.

The complaint was dismissed.

Fatehally Khamisa v. Captali Investments Limited, 1985 CanLII 912

Valerie Cassells

Romeo Best

Robin A. Barclay

Marilyn Becker

John Vanelli

J. E. Stibbards

Jeffrey Sack, Q. C.

2 cases1984–1985

J. Anderson

3 cases1983–1988

Helen O’Regan

6 cases1983–1986

Graydon McNair

Fran Macaluso

F. G. Hamilton, Q.C.

7 cases1980–1992

Cathy Lace

17 cases1982–2013

Barry Edson

10 cases1980–1999

W. H. Wightman

W.F. Rutherford

R. O. MacDowell

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 21, 1985

Board determines appropriate hospital service bargaining unit, including RNAs but excluding technical and clerical staff.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of service workers at the respondent hospital.

The hospital argued that the unit should be broader and include various technical, paramedical, and clerical classifications.

The Board reviewed the history and principles of bargaining unit determination in the hospital sector.

It concluded that Registered Nursing Assistants (RNA's) and Nursing Technicians should be included in the service unit due to established collective bargaining practice.

However, other technical personnel, lab assistants, and ward clerks were excluded, as they could appropriately be placed in paramedical or clerical units without affecting the viability of the service unit.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees v. The Hospital for Sick Children, 1985 CanLII 899

Norman Lemke

Gordon J. Weir

4 cases1983–1987

W.F. Rutherford

R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 7, 1985

Application to vary collective agreement dismissed as parties had reached a good faith settlement.

The applicant employer sought to reopen a settlement and vary a collective agreement under section 106 of the Labour Relations Act.

The parties had recently negotiated a compromise regarding the inclusion of home care co-ordinators in the bargaining unit, maintaining the status quo for existing employees but including new hires.

The employer conceded that the co-ordinators were employees and did not exercise managerial functions.

The Board dismissed the application, finding no basis under section 106 to interfere with a sensible settlement arrived at by both parties acting in good faith, noting that once a collective agreement is signed, any initial certificate is spent.

Renfrew County and District Board of Health v. Ontario Nurses' Association, Local 49, 1985 CanLII 906

R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 5, 1985

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Board directs pre-hearing representation vote following comprehensive settlement between union and employer.

The union applied for certification and filed an unfair labour practice complaint against the employer.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a comprehensive settlement.

The Board accepted the parties' agreement to treat the application as a pre-hearing application for certification and directed that a representation vote be taken among the employees in the agreed voting constituency.

The unfair labour practice complaint and the request for certification under section 8 of the Labour Relations Act were withdrawn.

Graphic Communications International Union, Local 500-M v. Mundet Industries Ltd., 1985 CanLII 903

R. O. MacDowell

F. W. Murray

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 5, 1985

C. A. Ballentine

OLRB0 cases1980–1992

Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as premature because conciliation process was not formally completed.

The applicant employee applied to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights.

The union had been certified over two years prior but failed to reach a collective agreement and had not contacted the employer or employees for almost a year.

Despite the union's apparent abandonment of the bargaining unit, the union resisted the application on the technical ground that the parties were still in conciliation.

The Board dismissed the application as premature under section 61(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act, noting that an application for termination cannot be made until thirty days after the Minister releases a "no-board" report.

A concurring opinion urged the union to surrender its certificate given its failure to represent the employees.

George Mihailidis v. Canadian Union of Operating Engineers & General Workers Local 101, 1985 CanLII 913

Scott Thompson

9 cases1985–2019

Rick Bailey

Jim Walker

Barbara G. Crosby

4 cases1981–1985

R. O. MacDowell

L. Lenkinski

OLRB0 cases1985–1987

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 5, 1985

Interim certification granted; employee petition opposing union rejected due to unreliable evidence of voluntariness.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A group of employees filed a petition opposing the certification, which included signatures of employees who had previously signed union membership cards.

The Board held a hearing to determine whether the petition represented a voluntary change of heart.

The sole witness for the objectors provided inconsistent and implausible testimony regarding the origination and circulation of the petition.

The Board concluded the petition was unreliable and declined to order a representation vote.

As the union demonstrated membership support in excess of fifty-five percent, interim certification was granted pending the resolution of the bargaining unit status of four individuals.

United Steelworkers of America v. Elks Inc., 1985 CanLII 896

M. Altcheh

Ken Petryshen

17 cases1980–1985

Ernest Weintraub

Donald McKillop, Q.C.

Barbar Maalouf Y Zahavy

W.F. Rutherford

R. O. MacDowell

J. A. Ronson