Stephen Raymond

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application against the responding employers.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave for the withdrawal.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at the responding party's retirement residence.

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.

Pursuant to section 62 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the intervenor union ceased to represent the employees in the bargaining unit.

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

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 issued a certificate to the applicant.

Pursuant to section 62 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the intervenor union ceased to represent the employees in the bargaining unit.

The applicant sought to withdraw its application against the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

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

The intervenor objected, requesting that the Board decline to consider the application or seal the ballot box due to alleged unfair labour practices and ongoing proceedings before the Superior Court and the Canadian Labour Congress.

The majority of the Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support and directed that a representation vote be held, with ballots to be counted except for those in disputed positions.

A dissenting Board member argued that ordering a vote before determining the bad faith allegations was inappropriate.

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

Following a representation vote, not more than fifty percent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were cast in opposition to the responding party.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Board dismissed the application and cancelled the previously set meeting and hearing dates.

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

The union advised the Board in writing that it no longer wished to represent the employees in the bargaining unit.

Pursuant to section 63(17) of the Act, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees.

The responding party raised an objection to the union's application pursuant to section 7(9) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the responding party did not provide sufficient specificity, particularly failing to cite the Board File number from the earlier application.

The Board deferred the resolution of the objection to the panel hearing the matter.

The applicant employee applied to decertify the responding party union.

A representation vote was held, and more than fifty percent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in opposition to the union.

The union had alleged a violation of section 63(16) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, but all matters in dispute were resolved pursuant to a Memorandum of Settlement.

The Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of Trillium Funeral Service Corp.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Aramark Canada Ltd. 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.

Pursuant to section 62 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the intervenor union ceased to represent the employees in the bargaining unit.

The applicant union requested reconsideration of the Board's decision finding that it could not be absolutely certain that 40% or more of the employees in the bargaining unit were members of the trade union.

The responding party objected.

The Board dismissed the request, noting that even after reviewing the membership evidence against the employer's information, it remained uncertain of the 40% support threshold.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of office and clerical employees at Temiskaming Hospital.

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 ordered that a certificate will issue to the applicant.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of para-medical technical employees at Canadian Blood Services.

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

The Board found the applicant's proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate and that the applicant established sufficient membership support.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board addressed two procedural requests in related files.

The Board noted the union's correspondence amending its application to add a responding party, leaving any issues arising from the addition to the hearing panel.

The Board also granted a request by the employer and an individual responding party to extend the time limit for filing their response to October 11, 2000.

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

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union and that it appeared to have the requisite membership support.

The Board directed a representation vote.

The intervenor raised objections based on alleged unfair labour practices and related proceedings before the Superior Court of Justice and the Canadian Labour Congress, requesting that the vote not be held or the ballot box be sealed.

The Board noted that it had previously declined to seal ballot boxes or adjourn proceedings in similar applications involving these parties, and directed the vote to proceed.

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 proposed a different unit, giving notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the applicant's proposed bargaining unit could be appropriate but could not be absolutely certain that the 40 percent membership threshold was met in that unit.

The Board ordered a representation vote and directed that the ballot box be sealed pending resolution of the dispute.

A dissenting Board member agreed that the ballot box must be sealed under section 8.1(4) of the Act.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

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

A representation vote was held, but the applicant failed to obtain more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast.

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

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party proposed a different bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, but agreed with the union's estimate of the number of persons in the unit.

The Board found the applicant established sufficient membership support and ordered a representation vote.

A dissenting Board member argued that the vote should not take place or the ballot box should be sealed until the section 8.1 issues were resolved at a hearing.