Jeffrey Michael Andrew

The applicant union sought an interim order under section 92.1 of the Labour Relations Act regarding changes to drivers' working conditions implemented by the responding employer without union input.

The union argued the changes violated the statutory freeze under section 81(1) of the Act.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the interim direction, ordering the employer to rescind the new arrangements and return the situation to what it was prior to the changes, pending bargaining in good faith.

The Ontario Nurses' Association applied for certification and sought to remove the phrase 'employed in a nursing capacity' from the standard bargaining unit description, or alternatively, to include the positions of Nurse Clinician, Pharmacy Technician I, and Discharge Planner/Infection Control Nurse within that definition.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to alter the standard craft-like bargaining unit description for nurses.

However, the Board found that the incumbents in all three disputed positions were required by the hospital to hold a Registered Nurse qualification and were expected to possess the training and skills of a nurse to perform their duties.

Consequently, the Board concluded that the positions were 'employed in a nursing capacity' and included them in the bargaining unit.

One Board Member dissented regarding the inclusion of the Pharmacy Technician I position.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of clerical employees at a medical centre, explicitly excluding registered nurses.

The responding employer argued that the appropriate unit should be an all-employee unit including the nurses.

The Board examined the community of interest and the extensive overlap in duties between the clerical staff and nurses, particularly in reception and patient handling.

The majority concluded that excluding the nurses would likely cause serious labour relations problems, such as jurisdictional disputes, due to the high degree of functional integration.

Finding the proposed unit inappropriate and noting the union lacked sufficient support for the broader all-employee unit, the Board dismissed the application.

A dissenting member would have granted the proposed unit to facilitate access to collective bargaining.