R. R. Montague

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Board authorizes Labour Relations Officer to post notice of successor trade union application at employer's premises.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration of successor trade union status.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board authorized a Labour Relations Officer to attend the employer's premises to post a Notice to Employees regarding the application.

Hotel & Restaurant Employees CAW Local 448 v. Retail Wholesale Canada, 2000 CanLII 9436

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Board authorized a Labour Relations Officer to post a notice of application for successor union status.

The applicant trade union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor union.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board authorized a Labour Relations Officer to attend the responding party employer's premises to post a Notice to Employees regarding the application.

Ontario Taxi Union CAW Local 1688 v. Retail Wholesale Canada, Local 1688, 2000 CanLII 7002

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Unopposed application for a declaration of trade union successor rights granted.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor trade union by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

Notice of the application was provided to the responding party employer and the predecessor trade union, and notices were posted in the workplace.

As no statements of objection or opposition were filed, the application was unopposed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the application and issued the requested declaration.

Ontario Taxi Union CAW Local 1688 v. Retail Wholesale Canada, Local 1688, 2000 CanLII 6455

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Declaration granted confirming applicant union acquired predecessor's rights via merger or transfer of jurisdiction.

The application was unopposed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the declaration.

Ontario Taxi Union CAW Local 1688 v. Retail Wholesale Canada, 2000 CanLII 10494

Timothy W. Sargeant

R. R. Montague

J. A. Rundle

Unopposed application for declaration of union successor rights granted.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

The application was unopposed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the declaration.

CAW Local 461 v. Retail Wholesale Canada, Local 461, 2000 CanLII 9247

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Representation vote ordered in union certification application with disputed ballots to be segregated.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board ordered a representation vote and directed that ballots of employees whose inclusion in the bargaining unit is disputed be segregated.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Hallmark Housekeeping Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 8160

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Representation vote ordered in certification application; ballot box not sealed despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board ordered a representation vote.

Although the responding party gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, disputing the bargaining unit, the Board found the proposed unit could be appropriate and the section 8.1 notice was not numerically relevant.

The Board directed that the ballot box not be sealed.

A dissenting Board member would have sealed the ballot box until the section 8.1 issues were resolved.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Tora Inc., 2000 CanLII 7962

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Representation vote ordered in union certification application; ballot box not sealed despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant union applied for certification.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found the applicant to be a trade union and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.

Finding that at least 40% of the individuals in the proposed unit were union members, the Board ordered a representation vote.

Although the responding party gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, it agreed to count the ballots, and the notice was deemed numerically irrelevant.

The majority ordered the vote without sealing the ballot box.

A dissenting member argued the vote should not proceed or the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues were resolved.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Centennial Plymouth Chrysler, 2000 CanLII 10919

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Representation vote ordered in certification application; majority directs ballot box not be sealed despite section 8.1 notice.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of at least forty percent of the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board ordered a representation vote.

The responding party gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, arguing the bargaining unit could not be appropriate.

The majority of the Board found the unit could be appropriate and the section 8.1 notice was not numerically relevant, directing that the ballot box not be sealed.

One Board Member dissented, arguing the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues were resolved.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. C. E. Jamieson & Company Ltd., 2000 CanLII 7192

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Board directs representation vote in certification application with segregated ballots for disputed positions.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that not less than 40% of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

The Board directed a representation vote to be taken.

Due to disputes over the composition of the bargaining unit, the Board ordered that certain ballots be segregated and not counted until the Board orders or the parties agree.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 175 v. Hallmark Housekeeping Services Inc., 2000 CanLII 9243

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Representation vote directed in displacement application for certification.

The applicant union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with the ballot box remaining unsealed, and deferred the intervenor's timeliness objection to be dealt with after the vote.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Thunder Bay Coalition Against Poverty, 2000 CanLII 9894

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 21, 2000

Bram Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–2026

Union certification application dismissed after failing to secure majority support in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party.

Following a representation vote where not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The Board imposed a one-year bar on further certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Graphic Resources, a Division of Rolland Inc., 2000 CanLII 7465

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 21, 2000

Bram Herlich

OLRB0 cases1990–2026

Representation vote ordered in application for certification by Christian Labour Association of Canada.

The Christian Labour Association of Canada applied for certification to represent employees of LT Greenwin Property Management Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held, with directions for segregating ballots of disputed sales and clerical staff.

Christian Labour Association of Canada v. LT Greenwin Property Management Inc., 2000 CanLII 7176

R. R. Montague

Patrick Kelly

OLRB0 cases1999–2019

J. A. Ronson

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardSep 20, 2000

Preliminary objection regarding contradictory positions referred to hearing panel due to material factual disputes.

The applicant union filed applications under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding housekeeping employees whose services were contracted out to a service provider by a predecessor hospital.

The successor hospital raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the union's position in the current applications contradicted its stance during earlier hospital restructuring proceedings under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

The union denied any contradiction and asserted it had consistently maintained that the housekeeping staff were employees of the hospital for labour relations purposes.

Finding material facts in dispute regarding the preliminary objection, the Board referred the matter to the Registrar to be dealt with by the panel assigned to hear the merits.

Service Employees Union v. Quinte Healthcare Corporation and Service Master of Canada Limited, 2000 CanLII 11969

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Application withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant sought to withdraw the application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Glen Ryerson v. National Steel Car Limited, 2000 CanLII 3283

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Caroline Rowan

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Union certified as bargaining agent following successful representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the union as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation & General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) v. Gas Cylinder Technologies Inc., 2000 CanLII 9644

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Board ordered a representation vote on an application to terminate the union's bargaining rights.

The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party union's bargaining rights.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit had expressed a wish not to be represented by the trade union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the employees in the bargaining unit.

The responding party's allegations under section 63(16) of the Act were deferred to a post-vote hearing.

A. Taylor and the Employees of Woollatt Building Supply v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 1059, 2000 CanLII 2969

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson

Caroline Rowan

OLRB0 cases1999–2022

Application for certification dismissed after union failed to secure majority in representation vote.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the responding party.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the applicant.

No statement of desire to make representations was filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and imposed a one-year bar on further applications for certification by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Acorn Packaging Inc., 2000 CanLII 4583

Russell Goodfellow

R. R. Montague

J. A. Ronson