5 total
Board declines to defer unfair labour practice complaints to arbitration where significant statutory rights are involved.
The complainant union filed multiple unfair labour practice complaints alleging that the respondent employer violated the statutory freeze and discriminated against employees for their union support during a displacement organizing drive.
The respondent employer raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the Board should defer the complaints to the grievance and arbitration process under the existing collective agreement with the incumbent union.
The Board dismissed the preliminary objection, declining to defer to arbitration because the complaints involved significant statutory rights, the complainant was not a party to the collective agreement, and the remedies available at arbitration might be inadequate.
Application to declare pole line constructors as dependent contractors dismissed; individuals found to be independent contractors.
The applicant union sought a determination under section 106(2) of the Labour Relations Act that two individuals performing pole line construction for the respondent were dependent contractors and thus employees.
The Board applied the 11-factor test from Algonquin Tavern to assess the relationship.
The Board found that the individuals operated a specialized, independent business, supplied their own equipment, set their own unit prices, and retained control over their work methods.
Consequently, the Board concluded they were independent contractors, not dependent contractors, and dismissed the application.
Tree cutters working exclusively for Ontario Hydro declared dependent contractors under the Labour Relations Act.
The applicant union sought a declaration that two tree cutters were dependent contractors for Ontario Hydro under section 1(1)(h) of the Labour Relations Act.
The workers had formed a partnership and contracted exclusively with Hydro to remove danger trees near power lines.
The Board found that the workers were economically dependent on Hydro, as they performed 100% of their work for Hydro and exhibited no entrepreneurial activity.
Furthermore, their duties more closely resembled those of employees than independent contractors, given the detailed instructions, training, and integration into Hydro's operations.
The Board declared the workers to be dependent contractors.
Union breached settlement agreement regarding seniority integration; Board ordered implementation of integrated seniority as remedy.
The complainants alleged that the respondent union locals violated a written settlement of an earlier unfair labour practice complaint regarding the integration of seniority lists following a hospital merger.
The settlement required the union to hold specific meetings to recommend integrated seniority before a ratification vote.
The Board found that the union executive held additional, exclusionary meetings that undermined the settlement, thereby violating section 89(7) of the Labour Relations Act.
The majority of the Board ordered that the integrated seniority lists be implemented as if the vote had succeeded, while the Vice-Chairman dissented on remedy, preferring to set aside the settlement and hear the original complaint on its merits.
Application for religious exemption from union dues dismissed as objection not based on religious belief.
The applicant, a teacher at a Jewish community school, applied for a religious exemption from paying union dues under section 47 of the Labour Relations Act.
She argued that her opposition to the union's collective bargaining activities, which had led to a work stoppage and community dissension, was based on her religious beliefs.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application, finding that while her concerns were sincere, they were not traceable to religious convictions or beliefs, as Judaism does not prohibit trade union activity and she could not identify a religious underpinning for her position.
