OLRB 2001

The employer sought production of documents from the applicant's spouse, a non-party.

Following an adjourned hearing where the non-party objected to production, the Board directed submissions.

After receiving a letter from the non-party indicating she may not have received the Board's previous decision directing submissions, the Board rescinded its prior decision and granted her 30 days to file further submissions regarding the production issue.

During a hearing for an occupational health and safety reprisal application, the applicant's counsel sought to cross-examine an employer witness on the identity of a confidential source who had informed the employer of the applicant's driver's licence suspension.

The employer objected on the grounds of relevance and privilege.

The Board upheld the objection, finding that the identity of the source was not relevant to the core issue of whether the applicant was disciplined as a reprisal for advancing health and safety concerns.

The applicant requested a four-week extension of time to file additional materials required by a previous Board decision, noting that the parties were attempting to resolve the issue.

The Board granted the extension, warning that failure to file the materials by the new deadline would result in the dismissal of the application.

The applicant filed an application under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties subsequently entered into confidential Minutes of Settlement.

Having regard to the settlement, the Board terminated the matter.

The applicant union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Cancer Care Ontario, Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre.

Following a representation vote where more than fifty per cent 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 ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant.

The applicant union filed an application for certification.

Following a representation vote where not more than fifty per cent of the ballots were cast in favour of the applicant, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application.

The Board also noted the potential application of section 10(3) of the Act to any subsequent application filed within one year.

The applicant applied to terminate the responding party union's bargaining rights for employees of Dalkeith Lumber Inc. Following a representation vote where 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 Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees.

The applicant brought a grievance against the responding party.

On the agreement of the parties, the Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the hearing to June 1, 2001.

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

During the hearing, the parties reached a memorandum of settlement to dispose of all matters in dispute.

The Board ordered the funds held in trust to be disbursed to the employee and the administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and rescinded the Order to Pay.

In applications under sections 21, 22, or 23 of the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, counsel for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 333 requested an extension of time to file a response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the deadline for any unions that received copies of the applications on May 14, 2001, to respond by June 27, 2001.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit to obtain a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken, with ballots cast by individuals in disputed 'Lead Hand' positions to be segregated.

The applicant union applied for certification.

A representation vote was held, but not more than 50% of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in favour of the applicant.

As a result, the Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application for certification and directed the parties' attention to the statutory bar on future applications under section 10(3) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding party trade union (OPSEU) brought a motion to dismiss the applicant's duty of fair representation application without a hearing, arguing it did not disclose a prima facie case.

The applicant alleged he lost his employment, OPSEU purported to file a grievance but he never saw it, and OPSEU took no action and refused to pursue arbitration.

The Board found that although the allegations were sparse, if proven true, they might make out a violation of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The motion to dismiss was denied.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the parties' request to adjourn the hearing scheduled for September 10, 2001, to a date to be set by the Registrar.

The panel noted it was not seized of the matter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board directed the responding party to respond to an application for reconsideration by a specified date.

The Board also directed the Registrar not to destroy the ballots in the application in the interim.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a previous Board decision regarding hiring hall referrals.

The Board reviewed its well-established principles for reconsideration under section 114(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, noting that it will generally only reconsider a decision if there is new evidence that could not have been obtained previously by reasonable diligence, or if a party wishes to make representations they had no opportunity to raise previously.

Finding that the applicant was merely attempting to reargue the matter and re-iterate assertions made at the original consultation, the Board declined to reconsider its decision.

The union filed an application alleging unfair labour practices, including reduction of hours and discipline of unnamed employees following an application for certification.

The union requested production of schedules and hours worked.

The responding party objected, arguing the union was on a fishing expedition and needed to provide particulars first.

The Board agreed with the responding party, ordering the union to provide written particulars before renewing its request for document production.

The applicant trade union applied for certification.

The responding employer disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the numerical difference between the parties was not significant and that the applicant had established sufficient membership support to obtain a representation vote regardless of which bargaining unit was correct.

The majority ordered a representation vote, directing that ballots cast by individuals in disputed positions be segregated.

The dissenting Board member would have ordered the ballot box sealed pursuant to section 8.1(4) of the Act.

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

A representation vote was held, and more than fifty per cent of the ballots cast by employees in the bargaining unit were in opposition to the union.

As no statement of desire to make representations was filed, the Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the employer.

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