Russell Goodfellow

The applicant employee sought review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay for an allegedly unpaid bonus and overtime.

The parties settled the overtime claim during the hearing.

On the bonus claim, the applicant argued the employer's bonus plan, which factored in cash and merchandise shortages, violated the prohibition against set-offs in section 8 of the Employment Standards Act.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the bonus plan merely established a formula for calculating the bonus pool, rather than making unlawful deductions from wages already owed to individual employees.

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 application would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed within that time.

The applicant appealed under the Employment Standards Act.

At the scheduled hearing, counsel for the applicant and the Ministry of Labour requested an adjournment sine die to allow an officer to consult with the parties and attempt a settlement.

The request was unopposed and granted by the Board.

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

The responding party trade union and the employer consented to the declaration being made without an oral hearing, and no employees objected.

The Board granted the application and declared the applicant the successor to the responding party trade union for the specified bargaining units.

The applicant filed an application under section 75 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding union requested that the application be dismissed for failing to plead an arguable case and requested particulars.

The Board directed the applicant to comply with the request for particulars and Rule 26 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.

The responding party was granted leave to renew its request for dismissal upon receipt of the particulars.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board reviewed the pleadings and submissions regarding an application by the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation.

The Board identified three main issues for the upcoming hearing: whether a meeting was properly called under the association's by-laws, whether a two-thirds majority was achieved to amend the by-laws, and whether it is too late to raise or remedy any procedural defects.

The parties were directed to advise the Board if they disagreed with the stated issues and to prepare for a one-day hearing.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statement of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

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

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.

The Board issued a decision amending a previous decision to correct an inadvertent omission in the bargaining unit description.

The name of the responding party, Selinger Wood Ltd., was added to the bargaining unit description.

A replacement certificate was issued.

The applicant union applied for certification.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision to correct a clerical error in its previous decision dated September 28, 2000.

The reference to Local 774 was amended to Local 3264.

The employer and Local 774 requested that allegations concerning conduct surrounding a representation vote be dismissed without a hearing.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the request and ordered the matter to be listed for a hearing expeditiously.

The applicant requested leave to amend its pleadings.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request as set out in the applicant's correspondence.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The responding party requested an adjournment of the matter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and adjourned the matter sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no further action is taken.

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.