Stephen Raymond

The applicant union applied for certification.

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 the same bargaining unit.

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

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the numerical difference between the parties was not significant and that the applicant established sufficient membership support for a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the voting constituency.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification.

The responding party employer sought to dismiss the application, alleging it was not served with all components, but failed to specify the missing components or any prejudice.

The Board declined to dismiss the application.

As there was a dispute regarding the appropriate bargaining unit and the number of employees, the Board could not be certain that the applicant had the requisite 40 percent support in its proposed unit.

Consequently, the Board ordered a representation vote but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending resolution of the disputes.

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 it appeared to have the requisite 40 percent membership support in its proposed bargaining unit.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and proposed a different bargaining unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The majority of the Board found the numerical difference between the parties was not significant and ordered a representation vote without sealing the ballot box.

A dissenting Board member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to subsection 8.1(4) of the Act.

The applicant union filed a displacement application 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 certified the applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

A certificate was ordered to issue to the applicant.

The applicant applied to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that the responding party union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The Board found the application timely and that not less than forty per cent of the employees had expressed a wish not to be represented by the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

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

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate but could not be absolutely certain that 40 percent or more of the individuals in the unit were members of the union.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken and that the ballot box be sealed pending further order or agreement.

The Board declined the responding party's request to delay the vote due to a federal election.

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union applied for certification to represent employees of Northern Cables Inc. Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of 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.

A related unfair labour practice complaint brought by the employer was withdrawn at its request.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of technicians employed by the responding party.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent 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 issued a final decision without a hearing.

The Board found the agreed-upon bargaining unit appropriate and directed that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant filed an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 seeking a declaration that the responding party union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The union filed a response stating it no longer wished to represent the employees.

Pursuant to section 63(17) of the Act, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees in the bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification for a bargaining unit of employees at the responding party's day care centre.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

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

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 certified the union as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

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

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast 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 certification applications by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

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

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to obtain a representation vote.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees and proposed a different bargaining unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken and that ballots of disputed part-time employees be segregated.

Board Member J.A. Rundle dissented, arguing that the ballot box should be sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act because the employer disagreed with the union's estimate of the number of individuals in the unit.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of employees at the responding party hospital.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and the resolution of all representations, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a final decision granting the certification.

A certificate was ordered to issue to the applicant.

The applicant union filed an application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On consent of the parties, the Board extended the time limit for the responding parties to file their response to November 29, 2000.

The Board received a letter requesting an adjournment of the consultation scheduled for December 7, 2000.

The Board directed any other party with submissions on the adjournment request to file them in writing by November 28, 2000.

The Ontario Nurses' Association filed an application for certification.

The intervenor, OPSEU, requested that the application be held in abeyance because it had filed a prior application for certification encompassing the same employees.

The Board agreed and ordered the application held in abeyance pursuant to section 111(3)(b) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 and section 28(2) of the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

The Board issued a consent order extending the deadline for the responding party to file its Response to November 24, 2000.

The applicant filed an application for termination of bargaining rights.

Following a representation vote where the majority of both full-time and part-time employees voted in opposition to the responding party union, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Settlement.

The Board declared that the responding party no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.