OLRB 2001

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

The responding party employer failed to file a response within the stipulated time.

Based on the application material, the Board found that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union.

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

The parties 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 no party requests to proceed.

The applicant union filed a request for reconsideration and a related employer/sale of business application.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board deferred the request for reconsideration until the determination of the related employer/sale of business application, directing that both be determined by the same panel.

The Board also extended the time for the responding parties to file their response to the related employer application.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party and an intervenor union objected, arguing that the affected individuals were employed by a different entity and already represented by the intervenor.

The Board found that the applicant had established the requisite forty percent membership support in its proposed bargaining unit.

The Board ordered a representation vote but directed that the ballot box be sealed pending the resolution of the disputes regarding the identity of the employer and the effect of the alleged existing bargaining relationship.

The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer.

The application was filed a few days after the 45-day statutory deadline.

The applicant requested an extension of time, explaining that the delay was due to counsel being out of the office.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the extension under section 68(4) of the Employment Standards Act, noting the delay was extremely short, the applicant had paid the required amount to the Director well before the deadline, and substantial grounds for review were provided.

The applicant union applied for a declaration of successor rights under section 68 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

A representation vote was ordered.

The responding party employer requested that the ballots not be counted due to a jurisdictional challenge.

The Board directed that the ballots be counted, noting that when a representation vote is ordered without a direction to seal the ballot box, the presumption is that the ballots will be counted to inform the Board of the employees' wishes.

The applicant sought a review of an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer.

The application was filed late and the applicant failed to pay the full amount of the order in trust, having improperly deducted statutory deductions based on total earnings from 1998 to 2000 rather than the gross wages portion of the order.

The Board held that the application was not properly made under section 68(7) of the Employment Standards Act.

The Board ordered the applicant to pay the outstanding amount in trust and to request an extension of time under section 68(4) within 10 days, failing which the application would be dismissed.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding employer repeatedly made late payments of contributions and failed to post a required bond.

The responding party failed to file a Request for Hearing and Notice of Intent to Defend.

Proceeding by default, the Board deemed the facts in the application accepted, found the employer violated the collective agreement, and ordered the employer to post a $50,000 bond and pay costs.

The applicant trade 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 parties agreed that the application would be determined by a representation vote among the employees in the bargaining unit.

To facilitate a prompt vote, the Board proposed abridging the usual time limit for filing responses and interventions, directing the parties to advise of any objections by July 10, 2001.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the responding union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

After reviewing the applicant's submissions on why the application should not be dismissed, the Board directed the matter to the Registrar to schedule a consultation hearing where all preliminary issues raised by the responding party could be argued.

The applicants brought various applications against the responding parties.

Based on the agreement of the parties, the Board permitted the withdrawal of several applications.

The Board also declared that Boemer Anderson Construction Limited and Heritage Memorials of Perth County Ltd. are related employers for the purposes of section 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and terminated the related employer applications.

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board found the proposed bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant union applied for certification.

Following a representation vote, the applicant did not receive more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application and directed the destruction of the ballots after 30 days.

The applicant union applied for certification.

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

The applicant trade union filed a displacement application for certification to represent employees currently represented by the intervenor.

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union under the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that it appeared to have the requisite 40% membership support in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be held to allow employees to choose between the applicant and the intervenor.

In a previous decision, the Board dismissed the applicants' duty of fair representation complaints against the union, subject to a direction that the union provide documentary evidence of an amended Record of Employment and vacation pay for the applicants.

The union filed an amended Record of Employment and copies of internal payroll forms and a recent cheque.

The applicants denied receiving the documents or the payments.

The Board directed the union to either provide proof that the cheques were cashed or arrange for the employer to issue replacement cheques, while confirming that the applications otherwise remained dismissed.

The applicant requested to withdraw her application against the union.

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

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

Following a representation vote where more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Board granted the application and directed that a certificate issue.

The applicant brought an application under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

Following an Officer's report that issues remained in dispute, the Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the parties to file briefs and documents, and scheduled a consultation to hear representations on the unresolved matters.

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

The responding party employer argued that the bargaining unit should include both Board Areas 8 and 9.

The Board rejected this argument, noting that section 158(2) of the Act permits the applicant to seek a bargaining unit confined to Board Area 9.

The Board directed that a hearing be held to determine whether the ballots cast by two disputed individuals should be counted, and ordered the parties to exchange relevant documents.