Beth Symes

The complainant union alleged that the respondents committed unfair labour practices by repudiating the collective agreement, reducing wages, and terminating a union steward who threatened to complain to the Labour Board.

The respondents failed to appear at the hearing.

The Board found that the operators engaged in a massive repudiation of the union and the employees' rights under the collective agreement, violating sections 64 and 66 of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board ordered the successor employer, Last Resort Hotel Inc., to pay unpaid wages and vacation pay to the affected employees, and remained seized of the matter regarding the potential personal liability of the individual respondent.

The applicant union brought an application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging a sale of a business occurred when the respondent corporation purchased all the shares of the employer.

The Board found that the transfer of shares left the corporate employer intact and did not constitute a sale of a business within the meaning of the Act.

The application was dismissed, with the Board noting that the union's bargaining rights and collective agreement with the original employer remained in effect.

The United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) applied under section 62 of the Labour Relations Act for a declaration that it was the successor to the Kraus Carpet Employees Association following a merger.

The respondent employers argued the Association lacked the power to merge without unanimous member consent and that the voting procedure was flawed.

A complainant employee also alleged the merger process breached the union's duty of fair representation under section 68.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that unanimous consent was not required for a trade union to merge under the Act, and that the single vote to amend the constitution and approve the merger was sufficient.

The Board declared the UFCW the successor union and dismissed the section 68 complaint.

The applicant union brought an application under section 55 of the Labour Relations Act alleging that a sale of a business had taken place when the respondents acquired the leasehold interest and liquor licence of The Horseshoe Tavern.

The respondents argued that they had merely acquired assets and changed the character of the business from a 'punk rock' venue to a 'country and western' lounge.

The Board found that the transaction constituted a continuation of the predecessor's business, noting that the tavern operated at the same location, under the same name, and that the 'punk rock' format was merely a brief interlude in the tavern's long history as a country and western centre.

The Board declared that a sale of a business had occurred and that the union's bargaining rights continued to bind the respondents.

The Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union and the International Ladies Garment Workers Union both conducted organizing campaigns at the respondent's plant.

The respondent laid off four key union supporters.

The Amalgamated applied for certification and both unions filed unfair labour practice complaints.

The Board found that the layoffs were unlawfully motivated by anti-union animus.

However, the Board declined to grant certification without a vote under section 7a, reasoning that both unions had been equally damaged and had competing claims to employee allegiance.

Instead, the Board ordered extensive remedial measures, including reinstatement with compensation, a posting and mailing of notices, union access to the plant, and a new representation vote.

The union filed unfair labour practice complaints alleging that the employer responded to its organizing campaign by relocating two union supporters, discharging the primary union organizer, and forcing another supporter to resign.

The employer claimed the relocations and terminations were for business reasons, including efficiency and absenteeism.

The Board found that the employer's actions were motivated by anti-union animus in violation of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board ordered the reinstatement of the discharged employees with full compensation, along with a posting order, union access to the employer's premises and bulletin board, and a list of employee names and addresses.

The Board declined to award damages for loss of dignity or additional organizing expenses, and denied the union's request for consent to prosecute.

The applicant union brought an application under section 55 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging that the respondent was the successor employer of a tavern business.

The respondent had previously sold the business to a numbered company but resumed management and control after the purchaser defaulted on its payments.

The Board held that the resumption of control constituted a 'sale' within the meaning of section 55, as it fell within the broad definition of 'any other manner of disposition'.

The Board declared the respondent bound by the collective agreement.

The Board also declined to award costs against the respondent for an earlier adjournment, noting its general practice against awarding costs as a penalty.