Judie Im

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay against the employer.

A hearing was scheduled, but neither the applicant nor the employer appeared.

As the applicant bore the onus of producing evidence and failed to do so, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay termination and severance pay to a former employee, a certified technician.

The employer argued it was exempt from paying under the Employment Standards Act because the employee was guilty of wilful misconduct, citing several incidents of poor and unsafe work.

The Board found that while the employee's performance was unsatisfactory and justified termination, his mistakes were not intentional or deliberate.

Therefore, the conduct did not amount to wilful misconduct, and the Order to Pay was affirmed.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay.

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

As the applicant bore the burden of proof, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application at the request of the responding parties.

The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay.

The applicant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

As the applicant bore the burden of proof and adduced no evidence, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The applicant employer sought review of an employment standards officer's decision ordering it to pay overtime to a former employee.

The employer argued the employee was exempt from overtime pay because his work was solely supervisory or managerial in character.

The Board found that while the employee directed the flow of work, he also performed a significant amount of physical labour and lacked authority over hiring, firing, and wages.

The Board concluded the employee's work was not solely managerial and upheld the order to pay overtime.

The employer applied to review an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer for unpaid commissions and vacation pay to a former sales executive.

The claimant argued she was entitled to commissions on contracts she secured before resigning, even though the employer only received fees after implementing recommendations post-departure.

The Board rescinded the Order to Pay, finding the claimant's contribution in merely securing the initial contracts was too remote and preliminary to confer entitlement to commissions on the fees ultimately received.