OLRB 2001

The applicant filed an application against the responding party union.

On agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the application sine die, noting it would be deemed terminated if no party requested to proceed within one year.

The applicant union filed two applications against the responding party employer.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications.

During a hearing for certification and an unfair labour practice application, the responding employer and the applicant union brought a motion to strike out certain allegations made by the intervenor union.

The intervenor had alleged employer support for the applicant union but failed to provide detailed particulars as directed by previous Board decisions.

The Board found the allegations to be untimely and lacking in the required particulars.

The Board also held that the reverse onus provision under section 96(5) of the Labour Relations Act did not apply to allegations of employer support.

The motion was granted, and the allegations relating to employer support were struck out.

The applicant requested that the responding party be directed to bring its telephone records to the hearing.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and directed the responding party to bring its telephone records for the period of July 1, 2001 to September 30, 2001.

The applicants requested reconsideration of a previous Board decision that directed them to provide membership addresses to the parent international union so it could mail a remedial notice.

The applicants sought to extend the time for members to respond to the notice, effectively attempting to avoid providing the addresses.

The Board dismissed the request, finding it was an attempt to restrict internal debate within the union and that the original order was necessary to remedy the parent union's prior violations of the Labour Relations Act.

Counsel for the responding party requested an adjournment of the hearing scheduled for October 12, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the adjournment and directed that the matter be heard on October 25, 2001, alongside a related file.

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

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed according to the settlement, with $1,500 paid to the employee, $1,328.80 returned to the employer, and the administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent 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 certified the applicant as the bargaining agent for the agreed-upon bargaining unit.

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

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

The applicant union filed a certification application and a related employer application.

The responding parties raised preliminary objections, seeking dismissal for failure to disclose a prima facie case and for delay in pursuing the certification application.

The Board referred the files to the Registrar to set down a hearing for the preliminary objections.

The applicant employer appealed two orders issued by a Ministry of Labour inspector regarding the composition and certification of its joint health and safety committee under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and sought a suspension of the orders pending appeal.

The Board noted that it was unclear from the filed materials to what extent the orders were currently not in compliance.

The Board directed the parties to file brief statements outlining exactly what remained in dispute before determining how to proceed.

The responding hospitals requested an extension of time to file their material with the Board.

The Board granted the request, extending the time limit for filing and delivering all respondents' material until October 31, 2001.

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 union, and with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board certified the union and ordered a certificate to issue.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent carpenters and carpenters' apprentices employed by the responding party in the construction industry.

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

In an application alleging termination contrary to the pregnancy and parental leave provisions of the Employment Standards Act, the responding party requested particulars regarding the applicant's mitigation efforts.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the applicant to produce documentary evidence of her post-termination earnings, including tax returns, T4 slips, pay stubs, and employment contracts, as these documents are relevant to the calculation of potential monetary damages.

The applicant union brought an application for certification and a complaint under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 regarding a representation vote and the employment status of an individual.

The responding party's request for reconsideration was deemed moot.

The Board found no reason to exclude two individuals from the list of persons whose status was in dispute, noting the responding party was arguing alternative legal characterizations rather than alternative facts.

The Board directed the Registrar to list both applications for a two-day hearing and ordered the applicant to file particulars.

The applicant union applied for certification and a representation vote was held, with more than fifty percent of ballots cast in favour of the union.

The parties had agreed to a bargaining unit description encompassing all employees, but the Board rejected this agreement, finding that the responding party only employed journeymen electricians and apprentices on the application date.

The Board issued a certificate for a bargaining unit limited to journeymen electricians and apprentices in the construction industry in the County of Lambton.

Following a finding that the union breached its duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, a dispute arose regarding the Board's remedial order directing the provision of independent legal counsel.

The applicant contended he was entitled to separate legal counsel at the union's expense, while the union argued the order only provided the applicant a choice in selecting the counsel to represent the union at arbitration.

The Board clarified that the order was intended to give the applicant input into the selection of the lawyer representing the union, not to provide separate counsel, as the union retains carriage of the grievance.

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

The Board abridged the time for filing responses and directed the employer to provide a list of bargaining unit employees and proposals for a representation vote.

The applicant sought to withdraw the application.

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the application.