P. Straszynski

The applicant employer brought an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging violations of sections 17 and 76 by the responding union.

The applicant sought to amend its application to add a claim for damages in the nature of common law damages for defamation, raising a preliminary jurisdictional issue.

On the hearing date, proceedings were interrupted by a fire drill.

The Board adjourned the hearing, noting that the jurisdictional issue regarding defamation damages would be better addressed in the context of the full facts underlying the conduct complained of.

The matter was referred to the Registrar to schedule four days of hearing for all outstanding issues.

The applicant applied to terminate the responding party union's bargaining rights under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

At the hearing, the union withdrew its allegations under section 63(16).

The Board granted the application and terminated the union's bargaining rights based on the results of a representation vote.

The Board remained seized to determine the applicant's request for costs and set a schedule for written submissions.

The applicant employee filed an application to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding union in the ICI sector of the construction industry.

The responding union brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the application, arguing that the applicant failed to serve notice on each Affiliated Bargaining Agency and constituent member of the Employee Bargaining Agency as required by section 63(3) of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board found that the applicant had served the trade union named on the ICI certificate, which was a party to the collective agreement.

Consequently, the Board held that the service requirements were met and dismissed the preliminary motion.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board to determine whether the employer, Meadowcroft Holdings Inc., is a 'hospital' within the meaning of the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act (HLDAA).

The employer operates a retirement living centre providing accommodation, meals, and varying degrees of medical and personal care to elderly residents.

The Board applied an institutional approach rather than a purely labour relations approach, focusing on the nature of the care provided rather than the potential impact of a strike.

The Board concluded that the employer's focus on the accommodation, observation, assessment, and supervision of aged residents qualifies it as a home for the aged, and therefore it is a 'hospital' under the HLDAA.

The employer applied under section 5(2) of the Labour Relations and Employment Statute Law Amendment Act, 1995 (Bill 7) to separate its existing combined full-time and part-time bargaining units into distinct units.

The employer argued that Bill 7 codified a pre-1993 presumption that there is no community of interest between full-time and part-time employees.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board rejected this argument, finding that Bill 7 did not codify such a presumption and that the Board must assess the specific circumstances of each case.

Based on the agreed facts, the Board found a clear community of interest between the full-time and part-time employees, as they performed the same duties under the same supervision, received the same training, and had similar conditions of employment.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of employees at the employer's manufacturing plant.

The employer argued that the appropriate unit should include employees at both its plant and its distribution yard, located 1.8 kilometres away, asserting that a plant-only unit would cause serious labour relations problems due to employee interchange and operational interdependence.

The Board found that the level of employee interchange was not significant or regular enough to cause serious labour relations problems if restricted.

The Board determined that the plant-only unit was appropriate and, finding that more than 55 percent of the employees in the unit were members of the union, ordered that a certificate issue.