W. H. Wightman

P.J. O'Keeffe

OLRB0 cases1980–1987

M. G. Mitchnick

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJul 20, 1983

Board dismisses preliminary objections to union certification, finding no section 13 bar for potential jurisdictional conflicts.

The applicant trade union sought certification for the office and field staff of the respondent trade union.

The respondent raised preliminary objections, arguing that the applicant was barred under section 13 of the Labour Relations Act because it is an 'employer' and that its constitution precluded the respondent's field staff from membership due to potential jurisdictional conflicts.

The Board dismissed the preliminary objections, finding that the potential for future jurisdictional conflict was too remote to trigger the section 13 bar and that the applicant's constitution did not explicitly prohibit membership.

The Board appointed an officer to inquire into the appropriate bargaining unit.

United Steelworkers of America v. Service Employees International Union and Service Employees Union, Local 204, 1983 CanLII 844

Michael Izumi Nash

W. H. Wightman

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

H. Kobryn

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 29, 1983

Employer ordered to reinstate employee and pay lost wages after breaching binding settlement agreement.

The complainant filed a complaint under the Occupational Health and Safety Act alleging he was discharged for raising a safety concern.

The parties reached a written settlement agreement during a meeting with a Labour Relations Officer, under which the complainant was to be reinstated without back pay.

The respondent's president subsequently vetoed the settlement and refused to reinstate the complainant.

The Board found that the respondent's representative had the authority to settle the complaint and that the settlement was binding.

The Board ordered the respondent to comply with the settlement by reinstating the complainant and compensating him for wages and benefits lost due to the breach.

Todd Bradley Lindstrom v. 500139 Ontario Inc. Operating as The Potato Centre, 1983 CanLII 888

Harold F. CalEy

12 cases1980–2000

C. M. McKeown

2 cases1981–1983

Annelli Jalvila

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJun 15, 1983

Kevin M. Burkett

OLRB0 cases1980–1984

B. Lee

OLRB0 cases1981–1985

Employer directed to proceed first in consolidated certification and unfair labour practice complaint involving reverse onus.

In a consolidated application for certification and unfair labour practice complaint, the union requested that the employer be directed to proceed first due to the reverse onus provisions of section 89(5) of the Labour Relations Act.

The employer argued that the union should proceed first, consistent with the Board's past practice in section 8 applications.

The Board exercised its discretion and directed the employer to proceed first, noting that the bulk of the evidence would relate to the section 89 allegations for which the employer bears the legal burden.

Board Member Wightman dissented, arguing that the existing practice of requiring the union to proceed first should be maintained.

United Food and Commercial Workers' International Union, Local 175 v. Canadian Pizza Co. Ltd., 1983 CanLII 872

R. Charette

K. R. Valin

9 cases1983–1996

H. F Caley

G. J. Sullivan

B. W. Adams

8 cases1980–1995

A. Cooper

2 cases1983–2015

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 19, 1983

S. Cooke

OLRB0 cases1981–2025

D. F. Franks

OLRB0 cases1981–1985

Decertification petition dismissed because it was circulated by a working foreman perceived as an employer representative.

The applicant, a working foreman, applied to terminate the respondent union's bargaining rights and circulated a petition signed by employees.

The Board first clarified a previous ruling, confirming that an agreement attempting to amend the bargaining unit in the provincial agreement is null and void under section 146(2) of the Labour Relations Act.

On the merits of the petition, the Board found that although the applicant was an employee in the bargaining unit and not excluded by section 1(3)(b), he was the sole representative of the employer on the job site for most of the time.

Consequently, the Board concluded that the employees would have perceived the applicant as a representative of the employer, rendering the petition involuntary.

The application for termination was dismissed.

A dissenting board member would have accepted the petition and directed a vote.

Gaetan Perreault v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 2486, 1983 CanLII 905

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMay 13, 1983

R. 0. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–1999

P.J. O'Keeffe

OLRB0 cases1980–1987

Union certified despite minor nomenclature errors in membership evidence following a merger and name change.

The applicant union applied for certification and a pre-hearing representation vote was held, which the union won.

The respondent employer argued that the union's recent merger and name change created a new entity or caused confusion among employees regarding the membership evidence.

The Board found that despite the variations in nomenclature, there was no substantive change in the union's legal identity and no evidence of employee confusion.

The Board certified the union pending the final resolution of the bargaining unit composition.

Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, Local 75 v. Food Corp. Limited (Urban Restaurant Division, Commerce Court), 1983 CanLII 898

W. H. Wightman

Stewart Cooke

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 27, 1983

Pamela C. Picher

OLRB0 cases1980–1983

Board eliminates 'no union' option on representation vote ballot where both competing unions had over 55% support.

In an application for certification where two competing unions both submitted membership evidence in excess of 55 per cent, the Board reconsidered its initial decision to include a 'no union' option on the representation vote ballot.

The Board concluded that because either union would normally be entitled to outright certification based on their membership support, the true question was which union the employees wanted, not whether they wanted a union at all.

The Board amended its decision to eliminate the 'no union' option, directing that the ballot only offer a choice between the two competing unions.

Lumber and Sawmill Workers' Union, Local 2995 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. BioShell Inc., 1983 CanLII 726

Brian R. Gatien

8 cases1982–2013

W. H. Wightman

Stewart Cooke

M. G. Mitchnick

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 21, 1983

Request for reconsideration of decision dismissing termination of bargaining rights application denied.

The intervener employer requested the Board to reconsider its decision dismissing an application for termination of bargaining rights as untimely.

The employer argued that a conciliation officer had not been appointed under section 16 of the Labour Relations Act, or alternatively, that the appointment was voided by the Inflation Restraint Act.

The Board found no grounds to alter its original conclusions, noting that the appointment of the conciliation officer was valid and not frustrated by the enactment of Bill 179.

The request for reconsideration was dismissed.

Alexandra Eadie v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, 1983 CanLII 746

Pauline R. Seville

6 cases1981–1983

J. Hunter

14 cases1983–2025

James Clancy

Ivor Oram

7 cases1983–1987

F. Koch

D. Alfieri

C. Slater

Chris G. Paliare

192 cases1980–2026

C. G. Riggs

17 cases1980–1998

Art Lane

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardApr 7, 1983

R. O. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–2001

L. Collins

OLRB0 cases1983–1987

Application adjourned as premature; Board declined to enforce subpoena on its own motion.

The applicant union brought an application under the Successor Rights (Crown Transfers) Act regarding the purported transfer of a Crown-operated facility to the private sector.

At the hearing, the respondent Crown submitted that the application was premature as no legal entity had yet been created to receive the transfer.

The parties agreed to adjourn the matter sine die until the transaction crystallized.

The applicant also requested the Board to seek a Court order enforcing a subpoena against a witness who failed to attend.

The Board declined, noting that under section 12 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, it is generally the responsibility of the party seeking the witness's attendance to pursue enforcement.

The application was adjourned for up to one year.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Ontario, 1983 CanLII 733

W. S. Cook

6 cases1982–2000

Ross Pirrie

P. Falzone

Marcel Lacroix

L. C. Arnold

38 cases1980–1992

G. P. Metsala

G. Bellefeuille

David Watson

22 cases1982–2010

Andrew Foucault

W. H. Wightman

Stewart Cooke

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 21, 1983

Pamela C. Picher

OLRB0 cases1980–1983

Subsequent certification application requesting pre-hearing vote treated as regular application when consolidated with prior application.

The applicant union filed an application for certification without requesting a pre-hearing vote.

The intervener union subsequently filed an application by way of intervention and requested a pre-hearing vote.

The applicant objected to the intervener's membership evidence, arguing it should be assessed as of the applicant's application date rather than the terminal date.

The Board held that when a subsequent application requesting a pre-hearing vote is heard together with a regular application, both are treated as regular applications.

The Board assessed membership evidence as of the terminal date, found both unions had sufficient support, and ordered a representation vote.

Lumber and Sawmill Workers' Union, Local 2295 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. RioShell Inc., 1983 CanLII 913

Pauline R. Seville

6 cases1981–1983

Ivor Oram

7 cases1983–1987

C. Wooding

2 cases1983–1983

Chris Paliare

10 cases1980–2016

B. H. Stewart

5 cases1983–1986

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardMar 4, 1983

R. A. Furness

OLRB0 cases1980–1991

P.J. O'Keeffe

OLRB0 cases1980–1987

Unfair labour practice complaint dismissed; employer's circular restricting union solicitation during school hours was lawful.

The complainant union alleged that the respondent school board committed an unfair labour practice by distributing a circular to occasional teachers during an organizing campaign.

The circular stated that union solicitation should not take place on school premises during the school day and warned of discipline for such conduct.

A subsequent circular clarified that employees could discuss union membership on their own time.

The majority of the Board dismissed the complaint, finding that the employer's communications were a valid exercise of its right to maintain order and prevent disruption of the educational program, and did not violate the Labour Relations Act.

A dissenting member would have found an unfair labour practice and ordered a remedial posting.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. The Board of Education for The City of Toronto, 1983 CanLII 929

Philip J. Wolfenden

16 cases1980–2011

B. Fishbein

68 cases1980–1996

W. H. Wightman

M. G. Picher

OLRB0 cases1980–1984

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 22, 1983

Reverse onus in unfair labour practice complaints does not violate Charter presumption of innocence.

The complainant union alleged that the grievor was discharged by the respondent employer because of his union sympathy, contrary to the Labour Relations Act.

The respondent argued that the reverse onus provision in section 89(5) of the Act violated the presumption of innocence in section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that it had jurisdiction to consider the constitutional challenge but dismissed it, finding that section 89(5) is civil and remedial, not criminal, and thus does not contravene the Charter.

On the merits, the Board found overwhelming evidence that the employer unlawfully terminated the grievor and interfered with the union, ordering immediate reinstatement with compensation.

International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v Third Dimension Manufacturing Limited, 1983 CanLII 983

Paul A. Biggin

Patricia Crowley

Brian R. Gatien

8 cases1982–2013

W. H. Wightman

Stewart Cooke

M. G. Mitchnick

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardFeb 4, 1983

Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as untimely due to valid appointment of conciliation officer.

The applicant sought a declaration terminating the bargaining rights of the respondent union representing clerical employees at a hospital.

The union and the hospital were negotiating a first collective agreement and a conciliation officer had been appointed.

The applicant argued that the passage of the Inflation Restraint Act, 1982, which extended compensation plans, effectively cancelled the conciliation officer's appointment, thereby making the termination application timely.

The Board held that for first collective agreements, the normal rights and obligations under the Labour Relations Act and the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act remain unaffected by the Inflation Restraint Act, except for the ceiling on compensation increases.

Therefore, the conciliation officer's appointment remained valid, and the application was dismissed as untimely.

Alexandra Eadie v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, 1983 CanLII 985

S. B. D. Wahl

154 cases1980–2001

R. Tersigni

2 cases1983–1984

Ross Dunsmore

18 cases1980–2022

Bob McLellan

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 24, 1983

George W. Adams

OLRB0 cases1980–1984

F. S. Cooke

OLRB0 cases1982–1984

Employer reasonably refused to hire union referral at nuclear facility due to security risks.

The union grieved the employer's refusal to hire a union member referred through the hiring hall to work at nuclear generating stations.

The employer refused to hire the grievor because of his past criminal conviction for attempting to export arms and pending U.S. charges related to smuggling aliens, both allegedly connected to the Irish Republican Army.

The Board held that while the collective agreement did not give the employer an unbridled right to reject hiring hall referrals, the employer retained the right to reject persons it believed to be unreliable or a security risk, provided it acted reasonably, in good faith, and without discrimination.

Given the catastrophic risks associated with nuclear facilities, the employer's refusal to hire the grievor was reasonable.

The grievance was dismissed with respect to the nuclear sites.

I.B.E.W. Electrical Power Systems Construction Council of Ontario v. Ontario Hydro, 1983 CanLII 815

W A. Lokay

P. M. Matthews

M. LaPointe

Janice Baker

29 cases1980–2000

W. H. Wightman

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardJan 13, 1983

R. 0. MacDowell

OLRB0 cases1980–1999

B. L. Armstrong

OLRB0 cases1980–1997

Campus supervisors found to be employees under the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, not managerial exclusions.

The union brought a reference under section 82 of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act concerning the status of six campus supervisors employed by the respondent college.

The employer argued that the supervisors exercised managerial functions and should be excluded from the support staff bargaining unit.

The Board examined the duties of the supervisors, which included security functions, monitoring campus events, and assigning work to three bargaining unit employees.

The Board found that the supervisors did not exercise sufficient authority over the bargaining unit employees to create a conflict of interest, nor did their security functions warrant exclusion under the Act.

The Board concluded that the campus supervisors were employees within the meaning of the Act and properly included in the bargaining unit.

One board member dissented.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Sheridan College of Applied Arts and Technology, 1983 CanLII 817

Tom McCarthy

Tami Nolan

Michael G. Horan

22 cases1980–2000

J. Bryant

Jack Doherty

F. G. Hamilton

28 cases1980–2001

C. M. Mitchell

38 cases1980–1999

Barrie Williams

Alex Beer

W. H. Wightman

S. Cooke

OLRB0 cases1981–2025

M. G. Mitchnick

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 21, 1982

Interim union certification granted pending resolution of managerial status of disputed editorial supervisors.

The applicant union applied for certification for a bargaining unit of editorial department employees.

A dispute arose regarding the managerial status of several first-line supervisors.

The union requested interim certification under section 6(2) of the Labour Relations Act pending the resolution of the disputed classifications.

The employer opposed, arguing that interim certification would cause disciplinary and bargaining difficulties.

The Board granted interim certification, finding that the employer's concerns did not constitute insuperable barriers to the commencement of meaningful collective bargaining.

A dissenting board member would have delayed the issuance of the certificate until the status of the disputed employees was resolved.

Southern Ontario Newspaper Guild, Local 87 v. The Spectator, 1982 CanLII 979

Raymond Thibault

Paul S. Jarvis

10 cases1982–2009

Michael Lalonde

W. H. Wightman

Stewart Cooke

M. G. Mitchnick

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 17, 1982

Union certified for part-time medical laboratory technologists to mirror existing full-time bargaining structure.

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union applied for certification to represent part-time paramedical employees at the Ottawa General Hospital.

The union proposed a bargaining unit of all part-time paramedical employees, while the hospital argued for a unit restricted to part-time medical laboratory technologists.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the hospital's proposed unit was appropriate, as it mirrored the existing collective bargaining structure for full-time employees, avoiding anomalies.

The Board certified the union as the exclusive bargaining agent for the part-time medical laboratory technologists.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Ottawa General Hospital, 1982 CanLII 971

S. Tatrallyay

2 cases1982–1983

Michael G. Horan

22 cases1980–2000

E. L. Stringer

8 cases1982–1997

A. M. Minsky

94 cases1980–2001

W. H. Wightman

M. G. Mitchnick

C. A. Ballentine

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 14, 1982

Application to terminate bargaining rights dismissed as petition signed during mass work absence lacked voluntariness.

The applicants sought a declaration terminating the bargaining rights of the respondent union.

In support of the application, a group of employees left work en masse during working hours to sign a petition at the Labour Board.

The Board found that the employer's failure to question or prevent the mass departure would lead employees to believe management supported the petition and would know who did or did not participate.

Consequently, the Board concluded the petition was not a voluntary expression of employee wishes and dismissed the application.

A dissenting board member would have directed a representation vote.

Concetta Fallico et al v. International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, 1982 CanLII 980

W. H. Wightman

S. Cooke

OLRB0 cases1981–2025

N. B. Satterfield

OLRBOntario Labour Relations BoardDec 3, 1982

Concurring Board members urge the abolition of the silent period rule prior to representation votes.

In a concurring opinion to a decision issued August 16, 1982, two Board Members commented on the Board's policy regarding the 'silent period' rule prior to representation votes.

They reviewed the Board's jurisprudence, noting a progressive reluctance to order new votes for technical breaches.

The concurring members argued that the silent period rule is anachronistic, causes unnecessary delay and litigation, and that its utility is outweighed by its inconveniences.

They urged the Board to cease its practice of ordering the imposition of a silent period under section 68(j) of its Rules of Procedure.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Local 1000A AFL-CIO-CLC v. Keele-Wilson Supermarket Limited, 1982 CanLII 981

R. A. Werry

38 cases1980–1994

Michael G. Horan

22 cases1980–2000

Chris G. Paliare

192 cases1980–2026

W. H. Wightman