Stephen Raymond

The employer appealed an Order to Pay for outstanding vacation and termination pay in respect of two employees.

The employer led evidence that the employees were casual employees.

The Ministry of Labour agreed that under section 2(f) of Regulation 327 to the Employment Standards Act, casual employees who may elect to work or not are not entitled to termination pay.

The employer did not dispute the vacation pay entitlement.

The Board varied the Order to Pay, directing the vacation pay to the employees and returning the termination pay portion to the employer.

The applicant union and the responding employers reached a settlement regarding a successor employer application under the Labour Relations Act.

The parties agreed that 3517616 Canada Inc. is a successor employer bound by the collective agreement, and Cotton Valley Enterprises Inc. agreed not to sublease to non-unionized companies in the future.

The application against 1252115 Ontario Ltd. was withdrawn.

The Board issued orders and declarations in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement, including a payment of $1,000 to the applicant.

The applicant union applied for certification and a related employer declaration under section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

Based on the agreement, the Board found the proposed bargaining unit appropriate and, following a successful representation vote, directed that a certificate issue.

The Board also declared Meadowcroft Group Limited and 5M Management Services Inc. to be related employers, and dismissed the related employer application against the other responding parties.

The applicants brought an application alleging that the responding union and its representatives breached their duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding parties argued the application should be dismissed for failing to set out a prima facie case, asserting that section 74 does not apply to internal union matters such as the amalgamation of locals.

The Board directed the applicants to file written submissions on whether the application ought to be dismissed.

The applicant union and responding city agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the consent adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter will be deemed terminated if neither party requests to proceed.

The applicant appealed an inspector's orders under section 61 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

At the hearing, the applicant stated it did not dispute any of the orders, but rather hoped the hearing would lead to the Ministry of Labour ordering dedicated risers for electrical heating systems in high-rise residential buildings.

The Board dismissed the application as the applicant did not seek to change the orders, and directed the applicant to contact the Ministry directly regarding its request.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave for the application to be withdrawn.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding whether St. Mary's Manor is a 'hospital' under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act.

Based on written submissions, the Board found that St. Mary's Manor, which provides care and supervision to elderly residents, meets the plain meaning of a 'home for the aged'.

Consequently, the Board advised the Minister that St. Mary's Manor is a 'hospital' within the meaning of the Act.

The responding party, the Niagara Regional Police Services Board, requested an adjournment of the hearing, with the consent of the Ministry of Labour but over the objection of the applicant Association.

The Board granted the adjournment, noting that the dispute regarding interim health and safety measures during the implementation of a new communications system might be resolved within the requested timeframe.

The matter was rescheduled and directions for document exchange were issued.

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement regarding applications for a successor union, certification, and a duty of fair representation complaint.

The Board previously determined that the Canadian Union of Retail and Transportation Workers (CURTW) was a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of CURTW, the Board issued a certificate to CURTW for the bargaining unit at the responding party's distribution centre.

The other applications were withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant, John Malcolm, sought to withdraw his employment standards application against Teamsters Local 647 and the Ministry of Labour.

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

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging that the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act by failing to pursue a grievance relating to payment for relief work.

The union and the employer argued that the grievance was brought to the union's attention outside the 30-day time limit set out in the collective agreement.

The Board found that the applicant did not communicate his expectation for a grievance to be filed within the required timeframe.

The Board concluded that the union did not act in an arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith manner by refusing to file an untimely grievance.

The application was dismissed for failing to make out a prima facie case.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) applied to extend its trusteeship over Local 1883 for a further 12 months until June 30, 2001, citing political divisions and membership apathy.

The Board received submissions from members both supporting and opposing the extension.

Finding that a full 12-month extension would serve no useful purpose at this time, the Board granted a partial extension until December 31, 2000, with leave for CUPE to show cause by October 31, 2000, if a further extension is required.

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.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay for eight weeks of termination pay issued in favour of the employee.

The employee did not attend the hearing.

Based on the uncontested testimony of a managerial employee, the Board found that the employee had telephoned the employer, requested a Record of Employment, and stated she was quitting.

The Board concluded the employee was not terminated, rescinded the Order to Pay, and ordered the funds held in trust returned to the employer.

The applicant requested to withdraw the application.

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

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union applied for certification to represent taxi drivers and owners operating for Metro Taxi Ltd. Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a certificate to the applicant.

An associated unfair labour practice complaint brought by the employer was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant employer appealed an Occupational Health and Safety Officer's orders.

At the scheduled hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant or the responding employer.

The Ministry of Labour appeared and requested that the appeal be dismissed due to the applicant's absence.

The Board granted the request and dismissed the application.

Pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement, the parties referred the issue of whether the Canadian Union of Retail and Transportation Workers (CURTW) is a trade union under subsection 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to the Board.

The Board reviewed CURTW's constitution and the minutes of its founding meeting.

Applying the established steps for achieving trade union status, the Board found that CURTW had taken the necessary actions and declared it to be a trade union pursuant to the Act.