3 total
Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing as applicant failed to allege a failure to accommodate.
The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of disability after being bumped into a Welder position during a workplace downsizing, rather than his preferred Plateworker/Welder position.
The respondent requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application.
The Tribunal found that the applicant was accommodated in his current position with no loss of income and did not allege a failure to accommodate, only that he was not in his ideal position.
The Tribunal dismissed the application as having no reasonable prospect of success, noting that the duty to accommodate does not require placing an employee in their ideal position.
Employee's request for Boxing Day holiday dismissed as collective agreement provided a greater holiday benefit.
The applicant employee requested a review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision that he was not entitled to take Boxing Day as a statutory holiday.
The Officer found that the collective agreement provided a greater benefit respecting holidays than the Employment Standards Act.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board affirmed the Officer's decision, finding that the collective agreement's provision of nine defined holidays plus two floating holidays constituted a greater benefit than the eight statutory holidays provided under the Act, even though Boxing Day was not specifically included.
Common mistake regarding COLA calculation does not vitiate a ratified collective agreement.
The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board pursuant to section 107 of the Labour Relations Act regarding his authority to appoint a conciliation officer.
The employer and the trade union had signed a memorandum of agreement, but the union argued it was null and void due to a common mistake regarding the calculation of a cost of living allowance (COLA) fold-in.
Both parties had mistakenly assumed the COLA entitlement was 10 cents per hour instead of 21 cents.
The Board held that the doctrine of common mistake does not vitiate a collective agreement where the parties specifically directed their minds to stipulated amounts and agreed to them without fraud or misrepresentation.
The Board concluded that a binding collective agreement was in effect and the Minister had no authority to appoint a conciliation officer.
