4 total
Judicial review dismissed; arbitrator's finding that employer must pay Ontario Health Premium was not patently unreasonable.
The applicant employer sought judicial review of an arbitrator's award which held that the employer was obligated under the collective agreement to pay the newly introduced Ontario Health Premium on behalf of its employees.
The Divisional Court applied the patently unreasonable standard of review, following recent Ontario Court of Appeal jurisprudence, and found the arbitrator's interpretation of the collective agreement to be logical and reasonable.
The application for judicial review was dismissed.
Shift differential applies to benefit contributions; retroactive remedy limited due to union's delay in grieving.
The union filed a grievance alleging that the employer failed to apply a 'time and one-seventh' shift differential when calculating pension, welfare, and union dues contributions for second-shift workers.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that the shift differential applied to all 'per hour paid' benefits, not just base wages.
Although the Board found it had jurisdiction to remedy breaches under prior expired agreements, it limited the retroactive remedy to the current and most recently expired collective agreements.
The Board reasoned that the union's failure to verify the calculations or raise the issue for over eight years demonstrated an indifference that made full retroactive recovery inequitable.
Preliminary objections to OHSA reprisal complaint dismissed; withdrawal of grievance before arbitration does not bar Board complaint.
The complainant filed a reprisal complaint under section 24 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act after receiving a disciplinary notice.
The respondent employer raised preliminary objections, arguing the complaint lacked particularity, was filed after an unreasonable delay, and was barred because the complainant had initially elected to pursue a grievance to arbitration.
The Board dismissed the objections, finding the delay was not excessive given the union's internal changes and efforts to resolve the matter.
Furthermore, the Board held that the statutory election of arbitration requires an actual adjudicative settlement; since the union withdrew the grievance before arbitration, the complainant was not barred from pursuing the matter before the Board.
Human rights complaint dismissed; employer not liable for co-worker racial abuse unknown to management.
The complainant, an East Indian employee, alleged he was dismissed and subjected to discriminatory conditions of employment on the basis of race.
The employer had dismissed him following an alleged physical assault on a co-worker, a decision previously upheld in part by an arbitration board.
The Board of Inquiry held it was not bound by the arbitration award because the arbitrator did not consider the human rights issues.
However, the Board found no evidence that the dismissal was racially motivated, concluding it was based on a developing company policy against workplace violence.
While the complainant had suffered racial abuse from co-workers, the Board found the employer was not legally responsible as management was unaware of the abuse until the final incident, at which point they appropriately disciplined the offending co-worker.
The complaint was dismissed.
