OLRB 2000

The union brought an application under section 69 and subsection 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, seeking a declaration that a sale of business occurred between Sobeys and several franchisees, or alternatively that they constitute one employer.

The responding parties moved to dismiss the subsection 1(4) application for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The union moved for production of the actual franchise agreements.

The Board dismissed the motion to dismiss, finding the union established a prima facie case for relief under subsection 1(4) regarding the relationship between Sobeys and each franchisee.

The Board also granted the union's request for production, allowing union counsel to review the actual contracts subject to confidentiality conditions.

The applicant union and respondent school board agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter will be deemed closed if neither party requests to proceed.

The applicant union filed an application under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act regarding the sale of a business.

Prior to the hearing, the parties signed a memorandum of settlement agreeing that a sale of a business had occurred from Les Soeurs de la Charité d’Ottawa to ARAMARK Canada Ltd. The Board issued a consent order declaring the sale and defining the bargaining unit for food services employees.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the respondent.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the applicant, and with no notice of intention to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for the employees of the respondent.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the union, and with no objections filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the proposed bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board ordered that a certificate be issued to the applicant union.

La requérante a déposé une requête en accréditation auprès de la Commission des relations de travail de l'Ontario.

L'intimé n'a pas déposé de réponse dans les délais prescrits.

La Commission a conclu que la requérante est un syndicat au sens de la Loi de 1995 sur les relations de travail et qu'au moins quarante pour cent des employés de l'unité de négociation proposée semblaient être membres du syndicat.

Par conséquent, la Commission a ordonné la tenue d'un scrutin de représentation.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees at a grocery store operated by the respondent.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots cast were in favour of the union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the application and ordered a certificate to be issued.

The applicant employer sought a review of an order to pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties reached a settlement agreement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, returning $554.32 to the employer and retaining $100.00 for administrative fees.

The applicant, Corporation Le Lycée Claudel, sought to withdraw its application against the respondent, Le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique, section 2519.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The applicant union requested that the responding party municipality produce certain documents and provide particulars.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the responding party to produce the requested documents and particulars it was prepared to provide by July 21, 2000, and to advise the Board and the applicant of any items withheld and the reasons for doing so.

Any remaining disputes regarding production or particulars were to be addressed at the upcoming hearing.

The applicant union requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing dates.

The Board granted the adjournment, amended the style of cause to reflect the correct name of the responding party, and noted that further disposition would occur after the counting of ballots in the representation vote.

The applicant employer brought an application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Following a representation vote where not more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the responding party union, the Board declared that the union does not represent the employees of the applicant.

Previously scheduled meeting and hearing dates were cancelled.

The applicant requested that the matter be heard expeditiously.

The Board directed that a copy of the applicant's letter and particulars be sent to the responding party, and referred the issue of an expeditious hearing to the Registrar.

The applicant referred a construction industry grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Prior to the scheduled hearing, the parties met with a Labour Relations Officer and filed Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board granted leave to withdraw the referral and cancelled the hearing.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

The responding employer filed a response containing a notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, disagreeing with the union's estimate of the number of individuals in the proposed bargaining unit.

Prior to the scheduled representation vote, the union reviewed the employer's response and notified the Board that it wished the application to be dismissed pursuant to section 8.1(5), paragraph 7 of the Act.

The Board dismissed the application.

The applicant union filed an application under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997 in anticipation of a municipal amalgamation scheduled for January 1, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the parties to file submissions regarding the Board's jurisdiction to commence the process leading to a representation vote before the changeover date has occurred.

The applicant filed an application under section 67 of the Employment Standards Act.

Prior to the scheduled hearing, counsel for the applicant notified the Board that the matter had been settled.

Consequently, the Board terminated the proceeding.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement agreeing to disburse the funds held in trust by the Director.

The Board ordered the funds disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $873.60 paid to the employee and $100.00 retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and terminated the application.

The applicant union filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act to enforce a written settlement regarding the contracting out of offender transportation services.

The responding party employer argued that the settlement did not apply to community escort services at a newly built, privately operated correctional facility.

The Board found that the settlement's language regarding offender transportation services was unqualified and encompassed community escorts at all facilities, including the new one.

The Board declared that the employer violated the settlement and ordered it to amend its Request for Qualifications to retain community escort work for bargaining unit members.

The employer applied for a review of an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer.

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement to resolve the matter without litigation.

The Board ordered the disbursement of the funds held in trust by the Director in accordance with the settlement, directing $5,932.70 to the employee and $593.27 to the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and terminated the application.