Timothy W. Sargeant

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor union by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

As no statements of objection or opposition were filed, the application was unopposed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the application and issued the requested declaration.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of its predecessor union by reason of a merger, amalgamation, or transfer of jurisdiction.

Notice of the application was provided to the responding party employer and the predecessor union, and notices were posted in the workplace.

No statements of objection or opposition were filed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the unopposed application and issued the requested declaration.

The applicant filed an application against the Ontario Public Service Employee Union.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a brief decision terminating the file.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated August 16, 2000.

The word 'timely' was corrected to 'untimely' in paragraph 3, clarifying that the application may be untimely in accordance with section 67(1) of the Act.

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

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision to correct a typographical error in the name of a responding party in a previous decision.

The name 'Corporation of the County of Oxford' was amended to read 'Corporation of the City of Woodstock' in Board File No. 1312-00-R.

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant filed an application alleging the responding union breached section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board previously directed the applicant to file a statement of material allegations by a specified date, warning that failure to comply could result in dismissal without a hearing.

The applicant failed to file the statement.

Consequently, the Board exercised its discretion under section 99 of the Act and dismissed the application.

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

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

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees at a Chapters store in Gloucester.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union and that the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate.

Based on the membership evidence, the Board determined that at least 40% of the individuals in the proposed unit were members of the union.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held on August 18, 2000.

Although the employer filed a section 8.1 notice disagreeing with the union's estimate of the number of individuals in the unit, the Board declined to seal the ballot box, finding that the 40% threshold was met regardless of which estimate was used.

Board Member Rundle dissented, arguing that section 8.1(4) requires the ballot box to be sealed when such notice is given.

The applicant trade union filed a displacement application for certification.

The Board noted that the application appeared to be untimely under section 67(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, because the incumbent union was certified within the previous year, a conciliation officer had been appointed, and the Minister had not yet released a report or notice.

The Board directed the applicant to provide submissions on why the application should not be dismissed as untimely.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted an extension of time to August 30, 2000, for the responding parties to file their responses, noting that a confirmation of filing was not sent until August 16, 2000.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the responding party an extension of time until August 31, 2000, to file a response in the matter.

The applicant, University of Toronto Press Inc., filed an application against the Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 3261.

The parties reached a settlement resolving all issues in the matter.

Consequently, the Ontario Labour Relations Board terminated the proceeding.

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

The Board found the applicant to be a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and determined the appropriate bargaining unit based on the parties' agreement.

Finding that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed unit were members of the union, the Board directed that a representation vote be held.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote where not more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The Board imposed a mandatory one-year bar on any further applications for certification by the applicant for this bargaining unit.

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

The Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant, Allan Styles, sought to withdraw his application against CAW-Canada, Local 252 and Abbot Harvey.

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

The applicant, Canadian Health Care Workers, sought to withdraw its application against Valleyview Home for the Aged.

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

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application.

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