OLRB 2001

The responding party employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the applicant union's unfair labour practice complaint due to delay.

The union alleged that four employees were terminated contrary to the Act, with the application filed between two and a half to eight months after the terminations.

The Board declined to exercise its discretion to dismiss the application for delay, noting the serious nature of the allegations involving termination of employment and the lack of actual prejudice to the employer.

The responding party and an intervenor requested reconsideration of a Board decision directing a representation vote in a certification application.

They argued the application was untimely due to an existing voluntary recognition agreement and raised issues with the ballot form.

The Board dismissed the requests, noting that conducting a speedy representation vote aligns with the purposes of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that the timeliness and ballot issues could be addressed by the panel assigned to hear the matter without delaying the vote.

The employer appealed an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement requiring the Director of Employment Standards to return $8,998.59 held in trust to the employer.

The Board ordered the return of the funds and noted the employer's intention to seek repayment of the administrative fee, directing the employer to Rule 112 of the Board's Rules of Procedure if it wished to pursue that issue.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees at the responding party's Thunder Bay Plasma Collection Site.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the parties agreed on the description of the appropriate bargaining unit, with the inclusion or exclusion of Quality Systems Associates to be determined in a separate proceeding.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued a final decision without a hearing, granting the certificate to the applicant union.

The applicant union filed an application against the responding employers.

On agreement of the parties, the Board extended the date for filing a response to April 24, 2001, or such other date as the parties may agree upon.

The applicant filed an application to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party union.

Following a representation vote in which more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in opposition to the union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.

The applicant sought to withdraw her application.

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

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

Prior to the scheduled hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Board issued a consent order declaring that the responding parties were bound to the Principal Agreement and had violated its union security provisions.

The Board ordered damages of $100,000, with $2,000 payable immediately and $10,000 held in abeyance subject to future compliance.

The applicant sought review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act, arguing that a truck driver was an employee of a trucking agency rather than the applicant.

The Board found that the driver worked full-time for the applicant, drove a truck supplied by the applicant, and that the trucking agency was likely a sham established to avoid employment obligations.

The Board concluded the driver was an employee of the applicant.

Furthermore, the Board found that the applicant was not permitted to withhold wages as a set-off under section 8 of the Act, as there was no statutory requirement, court order, or written authorization permitting it.

The Order to Pay was confirmed.

The parties requested an adjournment of the application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the matter sine die for a period not exceeding one year, after which it will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of Vincor International Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board determined on the basis of filed materials that the applicant had status as a trade union.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant, Carrie Green, sought to withdraw her application against the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and the Ministry of Labour.

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

The applicant requested to withdraw the application before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Board granted leave to withdraw the application and directed the employer to post copies of the decision for affected employees.

The applicant, Pioneer Construction Inc., sought to withdraw its application against the Ministry of Labour.

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

In an application for certification, the applicant requested that the Board correct its previous decision to reflect that it had already been found to be a trade union under a different name.

The Board reconsidered and varied its previous decision, finding that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party daycare centre.

The Board found that the applicant had not previously established its trade union status and directed the filing of materials.

Finding that at least 40% of the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union, the Board directed a representation vote to be held on October 11, 2001.

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

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of at least forty percent in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board determined the appropriate bargaining unit and directed that a representation vote be taken among the eligible employees.

Due to the job site being inactive, the Board directed the Registrar to mail the notice of vote to the employees' addresses provided by the responding party.

The applicant filed an application against the responding party.

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

The applicant union filed a grievance alleging the responding party employed non-members for work within the ICI sector.

The intervenor union argued the work, constructing a municipal skateboard park, fell within the roads or heavy engineering sector.

The Board determined that the end use of the project was exclusively recreational and not related to transportation.

Therefore, the Board declared the construction of the skateboard park came within the industrial, commercial and institutional sector of the construction industry.

The responding party notified the Board that the applicant failed to include blank copies of the Response to Application Regarding Employee Status and the Notice to Responding Party with the application.

The Board directed the applicant to deliver the missing forms forthwith and extended the deadline for the responding party to file a response to ten days after the date of delivery.