OLRB 2001

The applicant sought to withdraw the application against the responding parties.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant trade union filed an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties disagreed on the geographic scope of the bargaining unit.

The Board determined that the appropriate bargaining unit must be described by reference to the Board's geographic areas, specifically Board Area No. 1 (Counties of Essex and Kent).

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees in the defined voting constituency.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a decision amending a previous decision regarding a union representation vote.

The Board corrected an error to ensure the names on all ballots read 'UFCW Canada'.

Additionally, the Board amended the voting constituency to remove the exclusion for warehouse maintenance and janitorial employees, directing that their ballots be segregated.

The applicants filed complaints against the responding trade union alleging a breach of the duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, regarding their re-classification grievances.

The Board consolidated the multiple identical complaints and issued procedural directions, setting deadlines for submissions regarding the employer's request to be removed from the applications and for the union's response.

The applicant union applied under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration that it acquired the rights, privileges, and duties of the predecessor trade union.

The Board abridged the time for filing responses and interventions, directed the employer to provide a list of employees in the bargaining unit, and requested proposals for arrangements for a likely representation vote.

The applicant requested to revive the application but subsequently advised the Board that the matter had been settled.

The Board accordingly ordered the application withdrawn.

The applicant union applied for a declaration of a sale of business under section 69 of the Labour Relations Act following the creation of a new transit authority.

The parties entered into a memorandum of settlement agreeing to a bargaining unit description and a representation vote between two unions.

Following a representation vote in which the applicant union won the majority, the Board terminated the proceeding in accordance with the settlement.

The applicant sought to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union.

Following a representation vote where not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, the applicant and the intervenor employer requested a second vote, alleging voter confusion.

The Board declined to order a second vote, finding the ballot question clear and noting no valid reason for the request.

The application to terminate bargaining rights was dismissed.

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

Following a representation vote where the majority of ballots were cast in favour of the intervenor union, the Board declared the intervenor as the bargaining agent for the paramedics and ambulance attendants.

The Board also referred an alleged breach of the Minutes of Settlement to a Labour Relations Officer.

The applicant union filed an application against the responding party employer.

The parties subsequently notified the Board that they had reached a settlement.

The Board granted leave for the application to be withdrawn.

The applicants and responding party agreed to adjourn the applications sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the applications will be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, and not more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and directed the parties' attention to section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding future applications.

The applicant union applied for certification and a representation vote was held.

The ballots were segregated and sealed due to a dispute over whether the individuals who cast ballots were employees, dependent contractors, or independent contractors.

The Board directed the applicant to provide a list of witnesses and referred the matter to a hearing to determine the employment status of the individuals and other related issues.

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter would be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.

The applicant trade union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for a unit of sheet metal workers employed by the responding party in the construction industry.

Following a representation vote in which more than 50 per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued certificates to the union pursuant to section 160(1) of the Labour Relations Act.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees at Casino Sault Ste.

Marie.

The responding party disputed the bargaining unit description and the membership evidence, requesting that the ballot box be sealed.

The Board found sufficient membership support to order a representation vote and declined to seal the ballot box, noting that statutory and evidentiary issues could be addressed after the vote.

A dissenting member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The applicant union sought certification for a bargaining unit of professional student services personnel employed by the responding school board.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with all outstanding issues resolved between the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a certificate to the applicant without a hearing.

The responding party employer argued that the Board was required under section 10(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 to immediately issue a certificate after the applicant union won a representation vote.

The Board rejected this argument, noting that a certificate cannot issue when other issues, such as constitutional jurisdiction, remain unresolved.

The Board affirmed its earlier decision to postpone determining the constitutional jurisdiction issue until a later date.

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

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

The applicant filed an application against the responding party union, with the employer intervening.

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the application was withdrawn.