Stephen Raymond

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave.

The applicant alleged that the National Hockey League Players Association violated section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Following a consultation, the Board determined that there were substantive facts in dispute and issues of credibility.

The Board directed that a hearing be held de novo and provided the National Hockey League with an opportunity to intervene.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations 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 of the union at the time the application was made.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken of the eligible employees.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application via a letter dated May 30, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The solicitor for CUPE requested an extension of the time limit for filing an intervention.

The Board granted the request, extending the time limit for two weeks until June 19, 2001.

The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay under section 67 of the Employment Standards Act, claiming unpaid vacation pay for 1998 and 1999.

The employer failed to appear at the hearing.

The Board found the applicant was entitled to the claimed vacation pay and amended the Order to Pay, adding $2,400.00 for a total of $3,598.64.

The applicant union requested reconsideration of a prior Board decision, arguing the Board failed to answer whether a collective agreement was ratified in accordance with the Act.

The Board dismissed the request, noting its prior decision explicitly stated the collective agreement was ratified and the vote complied with the Act.

The applicant alleged that the trade union violated its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 by failing to pursue compensation for the period between her agreed reinstatement date and the date of the arbitration award.

The Board exercised its discretion not to inquire further into the application, finding that the union did not violate the Act by waiting for the arbitrator to issue his award, and noting that the applicant herself took no steps to return to work or contact the union during that period.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant union requested to withdraw its application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint against her union after it withdrew her termination grievance.

The union requested the application be dismissed for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board found that only one allegation—that the union refused to allow the applicant's son to represent her at an internal appeal—raised a prima facie case.

However, noting the union's by-law restricting representation to union members, the Board directed the applicant to provide submissions on how this refusal violated the Act before deciding whether to exercise its discretion to inquire into the complaint.

The employer appealed an Order to Pay termination pay to two former employees, arguing they were terminated for wilful misconduct and wilful neglect of duty after a customer overheard them having an inappropriate conversation about management.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the appeal, finding that while the employees' conduct was inappropriate, it did not amount to wilful misconduct or wilful neglect of duty because they did not intend to undermine the employer's reputation and it was not foreseeable that their actions would irreparably harm the employment relationship.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision that ordered the employer to pay him $4.49.

The applicant provided uncontradicted evidence that he was owed for 84.7 regular hours, 9 overtime hours, and 44 hours of termination pay, plus vacation pay.

The employer did not appear at the hearing.

The Board accepted the applicant's evidence and ordered the employer to pay $1,109.16.

The applicant filed an employment standards application against the employer and the Ministry of Labour.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board terminated the application.

The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

Following a previous decision, the Board was informed that the ordered monies had not been received.

The Board amended its previous decision to direct that the monies be paid to the Director of Employment Standards, in trust, and that the applicant's letter of credit not be returned until his obligations were satisfied.

The applicant union and individual applicant requested to withdraw their applications.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications and cancelled the scheduled hearing dates.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application.

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

The applicant sought review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order for minimum wage and overtime pay.

The Officer had determined the applicant was a domestic servant and thus exempt from those provisions.

The Board found that the applicant, who cared for two young children for eleven hours a day, was employed as a nanny, not a domestic servant.

Applying a broad and generous interpretation to the legislation, the Board held that her extensive experience raising her own children and grandchildren satisfied the requirement of experience equivalent to formal training.

The appeal was allowed and the responding party was ordered to pay the agreed sum of $750.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted intervener status to the National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) in an application involving Chris Gerosavas and Teamsters Local 141, as no party objected to the intervention.

The responding party, Cara Operations Limited, requested an extension of time to file evidence relating to a constitutional issue.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the deadline to December 22, 2000.