3 total
Application for review dismissed; unwanted sexual touching constituted wilful misconduct disentitling employee to termination pay.
The applicant sought a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision refusing to issue an order for termination and severance pay.
The applicant was terminated from his position as a loss prevention investigator after he engaged in unwanted sexual touching of a younger female co-worker.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board found the complainant's evidence credible and concluded that the applicant's actions constituted serious sexual harassment.
The Board held that this behaviour amounted to wilful misconduct under section 57(10)(c) of the Employment Standards Act, disentitling the applicant to termination and severance pay.
The application for review was dismissed.
Interim relief to prevent employers from imposing specific vacation weeks denied based on balance of harm.
The applicant unions sought interim relief under section 92.1 of the Labour Relations Act to prevent the responding school boards from imposing specific vacation weeks on employees during the summer.
The unions alleged that the employers' actions violated the freeze period under section 81 and constituted an unlawful lock-out under section 74.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the applications, finding that while the unions may have an arguable case on some issues, the balance of harm did not favour granting interim relief.
Granting the orders would effectively give the unions a total victory without a hearing on the merits, and any harm to employees could be remedied through compensation if the unions ultimately succeeded.
Request to set aside representation vote dismissed; campaign literature did not impair voters' critical faculties.
The intervener union, Local 272, requested that the Board not give effect to the results of a representation vote in which the applicant Association was successful.
Local 272 alleged that the employer provided improper support to the Association by settling an unfair labour practice complaint on the day of the vote, or alternatively, that the Association improperly exploited the perception of such support in its election campaign literature.
The Board found no evidence of improper employer support or collusion.
Furthermore, the Board concluded that the Association's campaign leaflet was not false or misleading and did not impair the critical faculties of a reasonable voter.
The request to set aside the vote was dismissed.
