Stephen Raymond

The applicant filed applications against General Motors of Canada Limited and the National Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) and its Local 27.

Having regard to the settlement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the applications withdrawn.

The applicant requested an adjournment at the outset of a consultation due to medical reasons, providing a medical note.

The respondent trade union and intervenor employer opposed the request.

The Board granted the adjournment, noting that a consultation should take place in the presence of the applicant and that there was no significant prejudice to the parties.

The Board also directed the parties to file written submissions on whether the application sets out a prima facie violation of the Act.

The applicant failed to file a Certificate of Delivery by the deadline set in a previous Board decision.

As a result, the application was dismissed.

The Board received a letter from counsel for the intervenor advising that the applications had been settled.

The Board directed counsel for the applicants to advise the Board as to the status of the applications as a result of the settlement.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent food and beverage workers employed by the responding party.

The Board previously determined that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act.

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

The applicant filed an application alleging a violation of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party trade union requested that the application be dismissed for failing to disclose a prima facie violation of the Act.

The Board directed that the applicant be afforded an opportunity to respond to the union's motion before the Board disposes of it, and set a timeline for submissions.

The applicant submitted a letter to the Ontario Labour Relations Board requesting a determination based solely on the filed materials.

The Board declined to determine the issue on the materials alone, noting that a consultation was already scheduled.

The consultation was ordered to proceed as scheduled unless the application is withdrawn or resolved.

The applicant filed an application alleging a violation of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party trade union brought a motion to dismiss the application on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction, excessive delay, and failure to make out a prima facie case.

The Board deferred ruling on the motion to dismiss and directed the applicant to file submissions responding to the trade union's motion within one month.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

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 and directed a representation vote, with ballots for disputed maintenance employee positions to be segregated.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation at Kawartha Racetrack Slots.

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

Due to a dispute over the inclusion of security guards and other positions, the Board directed that the ballots of individuals in those disputed positions be segregated and the ballot box sealed pending further order.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party at the Espanola Price Chopper.

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 applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The responding party requested an extension of time to file its response.

The Board granted the request, extending the time limit for filing the response and any intervention to August 24, 2001.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than 50 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 noted that the employer would continue to be represented by the intervenor.

The Board also directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Act regarding the effect of the dismissal on any subsequent application filed within one year.

The applicants withdrew their application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent parking attendants employed by the responding party.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, and with all post-vote matters resolved, the Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

A representation vote was held, but the union failed to obtain more than fifty percent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and noted the potential one-year bar on subsequent applications under section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and noted the potential one-year bar on subsequent applications under section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant union and responding parties agreed to extend the time limit for filing a response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the extension to August 31, 2001, on consent.

The responding party requested an extension of time to file its response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the time limit to August 27, 2001.

The responding party requested an adjournment of the hearing.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board considered the submissions and granted the adjournment, directing that a new hearing date be set in consultation with the parties.