Ontario Labour Relations Board

In a certification application, the applicant union requested that the ballots of five disputed individuals be counted, conceding that the application should be dismissed if it lacked majority support among them.

The responding employer and intervenor union opposed the request but identified no prejudice.

The Board ordered the ballots to be counted, noting it could resolve the matter without further litigation.

The applicant filed an application alleging a breach of the duty of fair representation under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding union submitted that the employment relations were federally regulated, providing a Canada Labour Relations Board certificate.

The Board directed the applicant to file submissions disputing the jurisdictional issue within ten days, failing which the application would be deemed terminated.

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

The responding party opposed the application, asserting there were no bargaining unit employees at work on the application date.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support and directed that a representation vote be taken, deferring the responding party's objection until after the vote.

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

The parties executed Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board issued declarations that the responding party is bound by several collective agreements and ordered the responding party to pay $5,000.00 in full and final settlement of all claims up to November 6, 2001.

The Board also ordered the responding party to provide notice of future projects covered by the collective agreements.

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

The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board cancelled the hearing dates set for November 22 and 23, 2001, as it was unlikely to deliver its decision on a constitutional issue before then.

The parties were directed to be prepared to proceed on the next scheduled dates of December 6 and 7, 2001.

The applicant sought an adjournment of the application.

Having regard to the agreement of the parties present at the hearing, the Ontario Labour Relations Board adjourned the application to January 2, 2002.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board under s. 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding party employer failed to return the grievor to work following a workplace injury.

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

The applicant requested the Board determine the matter based solely on its filed materials.

The Board declined to make the requested declarations and orders, finding the applicant's pleadings insufficient to establish that work was available for the grievor at the relevant times.

The scheduled hearing was ordered to proceed.

The applicant requested to withdraw its applications.

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

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

The Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

The applicant filed a complaint alleging the union violated section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 by conspiring with the employer to pay certain job classifications at a higher level for some members than others.

The responding union requested that the Board dismiss the matter without a hearing for failing to disclose a prima facie case.

The Board considered only the applicant's submissions and found that, although not elaborate, the applicant pleaded enough to allow the matter to proceed.

The union's request was denied and the matter was referred to the Registrar.

The applicant filed an application for review of an Officer's refusal to issue an order to pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The application was filed more than 45 days after the Officer's letter, making it untimely.

The applicant was given 10 days to file submissions requesting an extension of time but failed to do so.

The Board dismissed the application as untimely.

The applicants filed an unfair labour practice complaint and an unlawful strike application against the responding party.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board noted that the pleadings in both matters were identical.

The Board ordered that the time period for filing a response in the unfair labour practice complaint be shortened and listed both matters to be heard together.

The applicant sought a review of a refusal to issue an order to pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The parties entered into Minutes of Settlement with the assistance of a Labour Relations Officer, whereby the employer agreed to pay $2,000.00 and provide an employment letter, and the applicant agreed to release all claims.

The Board terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

The Board revoked its previous decision dated October 2, 2001, after realizing that the ballots from a representation vote held on June 22, 2000, had not been counted.

The applicant union argued that the parties' Minutes of Settlement meant the vote results should be disregarded and the application terminated without consequences.

The Board rejected this, noting the Labour Relations Act limits discretion to disregard votes or simply terminate applications.

The Board directed the applicant to choose whether to count the ballots or withdraw the application, noting that either choice could trigger a statutory bar on future applications.

The applicant union alleged that the responding party employer violated the duty to bargain in good faith under section 17 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

During negotiations for a closure agreement regarding the National Parts Department warehouse, the employer disclosed the closure but did not specifically state that some warehouse-type work would continue to be performed by other employees at the same location.

The union argued this omission amounted to a misrepresentation that induced it to agree to the closure agreement.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the employer had provided all necessary information about the closure and was not required to initiate a discussion about the other work, which it considered outside the bargaining unit.

The union's mistaken assumption was its own responsibility, as it could have sought clarification.

The applicant union sought to withdraw its application against the responding party employer.

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

The applicant requested leave to amend its pleadings to add particulars set out in a letter dated November 12, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request.

The applicants filed an application for termination of bargaining rights under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed the application due to several procedural defects, including the use of photocopied signatures, failure to deliver the application to the responding party before filing, and failure to propose a date for a Board-ordered vote.

The application was terminated without prejudice to the filing of a new, timely application.

The applicant requested to withdraw its application via correspondence.

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