Christopher M. Little

The plaintiff employee brought a summary judgment motion seeking 24 months' common law notice following his without-cause termination.

The defendant employer sought summary judgment dismissing the action, arguing the plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages.

The plaintiff, an unskilled labourer, chose to retrain as a welder rather than apply for three comparable positions available at the employer's other locations.

The court found that the employer met its onus under the Michaels test to establish that comparable work was available and the plaintiff could have procured it.

The court held that the plaintiff's decision to retrain did not constitute reasonable mitigation in these circumstances, and his entitlement to damages ended when he chose not to pursue the available positions.

As the plaintiff had already received eight months' severance pay, the action was dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on race, colour, ethnic origin, and disability.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing on its own initiative to determine whether the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal dismissed one allegation regarding a supervisor calling the applicant a thief, finding no evidence linking the conduct to a protected ground.

The remaining allegations, which involved factual disputes regarding performance management and accommodation following a head injury, were allowed to proceed to a full hearing.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of disability (knee injury) with respect to her employment, claiming her employer failed to accommodate her need for rest breaks and that her supervisor mistreated her when she requested accommodation.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal dismissed the allegations regarding the employer's sick leave form and the location of rest breaks, finding no evidence connecting the employer's actions to the applicant's disability and noting the lack of medical evidence supporting her preferred accommodation.

The Tribunal allowed the allegations of mistreatment by the supervisor to proceed, provided the applicant files full particulars within 14 days.

The applicant alleged discrimination in employment based on sex, claiming she was terminated because she had been on pregnancy leave.

The respondent employer, a non-profit childcare provider, demonstrated that during the applicant's leave, it closed two centres due to declining enrolment and implemented automated phone and email systems, which eliminated the need for the applicant's receptionist position.

The Tribunal found that the termination was based on legitimate, non-discriminatory business reasons and dismissed the application.

The union applied for certification in the construction industry.

A representation vote was held, and the eligibility of three carpenters to vote was challenged.

The union argued the carpenters were hired by the site superintendent on behalf of the employer.

The Board found the superintendent lacked actual authority to hire and that the employer had not made any representation to clothe him with ostensible authority.

Consequently, the carpenters were not employees of the responding party.

As the union could not demonstrate 40 percent membership support among the remaining eligible voters, the application for certification was dismissed under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act.

In an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board issued a procedural ruling regarding the order of evidence for challenges to the voters' list.

The Board directed that the applicant call its evidence first regarding three specific individuals, followed by the responding party's evidence.

The Board also set out the procedure for arguing a motion to bifurcate the proceeding.

The Board considered whether a Memorandum of Agreement between Tyger Construction Inc. and the Labourers' International Union of North America (OPDC) constituted a valid collective agreement.

The Carpenters' Union had applied for certification, and the OPDC argued its agreement was a bar.

The Board determined that the Memorandum of Agreement was a valid collective agreement.

It found that the agreement incorporated by reference the terms and conditions of other collective agreements for non-ICI work, but did not make Tyger a party to those other separate collective agreements.

The Board concluded that the OPDC holds valid bargaining rights for construction labourers as defined in the agreement.

In an application for related employer and sale of business declarations, the responding parties raised a preliminary issue regarding the burden of proof to establish the existence of a collective agreement.

The applicants argued that the responding parties bore the burden under sections 1(5) and 69(13) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board held that the applicants bear the initial burden of proving the existence of the voluntary recognition agreement that created the bargaining rights upon which they rely.

The Board also made procedural directions regarding document production and scheduled further hearing dates.

The union applied for an interim order to prevent the employer from unilaterally excluding seven employees from the bargaining unit at the commencement of a lawful strike.

The employer argued the Board's jurisdiction to grant interim relief was limited to procedural matters under section 98 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board held that section 16.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act grants it a general power to make interim orders, which prevails over section 98 of the LRA due to the conflict provision in section 32 of the SPPA.

Applying the two-pronged test for interim relief, the Board found the union had established an arguable case of unfair labour practices and that the balance of labour relations harm favoured granting the order, as the employer's actions undermined the strike and union morale.