Gregory McGinnis

The applicant, a tool and die maker with bilateral hand restrictions from work-related injuries, alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

He claimed the employer failed to accommodate him, denied him overtime, subjected him to harassment by management and coworkers, and terminated his employment because of his disability.

The Tribunal found that the employer had accommodated the applicant by providing a bundle of tasks within his medical restrictions.

The Tribunal also found that the lack of overtime was due to the nature of his modified duties, the alleged comments did not amount to harassment, and the termination was part of a mass layoff resulting from a plant closure, not based on his disability.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant union filed a second application for certification immediately after being granted leave to withdraw its first application.

The responding party employer argued that the withdrawal decision was a nullity because it was made without seeking submissions, and requested that the Board impose a bar on the second application and award costs.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the employer's arguments, finding no breach of natural justice in the withdrawal process.

The Board declined to impose a bar, finding no abuse of process, and confirmed it lacked jurisdiction to award costs.

The second application was permitted to proceed.

The union filed an application for certification and an unfair labour practice complaint alleging the employer padded the voters list with non-employees to defeat the certification application.

The employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the unfair labour practice complaint for failing to establish a prima facie case.

The Board dismissed the motion regarding the alleged breach of section 70, finding the pleadings raised a factual concern about the employer's motive.

However, the Board dismissed the allegations under sections 72 and 76 on a prima facie basis, as the pleadings did not demonstrate discrimination, threats, or intimidation.

The applicant union sought the production of documents in relation to an application for certification.

At the hearing, the responding party employer filed a number of documents which the union had not yet reviewed.

The Board made oral rulings directing the employer to produce documentation relating to 37 individuals and to produce for inspection all employment records relating to persons employed by or retained through ARG who performed work at the employer's location during the six months prior to the certification application.

The unfair labour practice complaint was scheduled to be heard at the same time as the certification application.