Daniel Fryzuk

The applicant trade union applied for certification of a bargaining unit of construction labourers employed by the respondent.

The parties disputed the inclusion of five individuals on the list of employees.

The Board applied the Gilvesy test to determine employee status on the date of application.

The Board found that one individual did not exercise managerial functions and was included, another was performing bargaining unit work and was included, and two others were more likely than not employees and were included.

One individual was excluded due to insufficient evidence.

Finding that the union had the requisite membership support, the Board directed a representation vote.

The applicant employers' organization applied for accreditation in the construction industry under section 125 of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board found that the applicant was a properly constituted employers' organization and that the proposed unit of employers was appropriate for collective bargaining.

The Board determined that the applicant represented a majority of the employers in the unit, who in turn employed a majority of the employees affected.

Although all statutory requirements for accreditation were met, the Board withheld the issuance of the certificate pending a determination on whether it would continue its practice of compiling a Final Schedule 'F' of employers.

The applicant applied for accreditation under section 125 of the Labour Relations Act.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued an interim decision confirming a unanimous oral ruling establishing general guidelines for determining the composition of the employer unit and the related lists of employers and employees.

The Board set out criteria for deciding whether the respondent held bargaining rights in the sewers and watermains sector in Board area #8 and the scope of the work encompassed by the unit of employers.

The applicant sought accreditation as the bargaining agent for employers in the sewers and watermains sector.

The respondent and interveners challenged the applicant's status, arguing it was not a properly constituted employers' organization under the Labour Relations Act due to alleged defects in its by-laws and their enactment.

The Board found that the applicant was an employers' organization within the meaning of the Act and that its by-laws were properly enacted.

The Board held that imposing additional pre-conditions for accreditation based on internal by-law provisions would exceed its jurisdiction, and concluded the applicant was a properly constituted organization.