Ontario Labour Relations Board

The applicant requested to withdraw his application against Madawaska Doors Inc. and the Ministry of Labour.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The employer applied for a review of an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay.

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement to resolve the matter.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the disbursement of the funds held in trust by the Director in accordance with the settlement and terminated the application.

The parties requested an adjournment of the matters.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and adjourned the matters to a date to be set following November 1, 2001.

The applicants filed a complaint alleging that their union violated its duty of fair representation by failing to process a grievance arising from a plant closure to arbitration in a timely manner.

The union responded that it was actively processing the grievance and intended to proceed to arbitration.

Noting the 21-month delay, the Board directed the union to advise when it expected the grievance to reach arbitration, remaining seized of the application.

The responding party employer requested reconsideration of a Board decision certifying the union following a successful representation vote.

The employer argued that the union improperly pressured employees by promising significantly larger projects and greater job security, and noted that two employees resigned a month after the vote.

The Board dismissed the request, finding that a union's promise of better conditions during an organizing campaign is not unlawful, and the subsequent resignations did not indicate any unlawfulness.

The applicant filed a duty of fair representation complaint alleging the union refused to grieve his termination and denial of accommodation.

The union filed a detailed response.

The Board declined to dismiss the application for failing to make out a prima facie case at this stage.

Instead, the Board directed the applicant to file a statement detailing his disagreement with the union's response and providing support for his allegations of termination and sought accommodation.

The applicant requested to withdraw the application.

The Board granted leave to withdraw the application.

The parties agreed to adjourn the application sine die until October 10, 2001.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment, noting that the application would be dismissed without further notice if neither party requested a hearing before that date.

The applicant union applied for certification as the bargaining agent for security guards employed by 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 bargaining unit appropriate.

The Board ordered that a certificate issue to the applicant union.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing for an application for review under the Employment Standards Act.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board denied the adjournment request based on the written correspondence, but noted the applicant could renew the request before the panel at the hearing.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Résidence St. Louis.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support of not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The responding party's objection to the appropriateness of the proposed bargaining unit was deferred to a post-vote hearing if necessary.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent a bargaining unit of employees at Cancer Care Ontario.

The Board found that the applicant established sufficient membership support to warrant a representation vote.

However, because the responding party proposed a significantly larger bargaining unit reflecting a pre-existing unit, the Board directed that the representation vote proceed but ordered the ballot box sealed and all ballots segregated pending a final determination on the appropriate bargaining unit composition.

The responding party requested an extension of time to file a response.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request, extending the time for filing a response and any intervention to October 26, 2001.

The applicants filed an application against the responding party union.

The application was withdrawn with leave of the Board.

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

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 Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of Jarvis Design & Display Ltd.

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 is a trade union and that at least forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members at the time of the application.

The Board directed a representation vote for the bargaining unit of carpenters and carpenters' apprentices in the County of Simcoe and the District Municipality of Muskoka.

The responding party's objection under section 8.1 of the Act regarding the number of individuals in the bargaining unit was deferred to a post-vote hearing, as it did not raise a numerically significant challenge.

The applicant sought an extension of time to file an application for review of an employment standards officer's refusal to issue an Order to Pay.

The applicant missed the 45-day deadline because he initially filed the wrong form.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the extension, noting the brief delay and the applicant's timely attempt to file using the incorrect form.

In an application for certification under the construction industry provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, the Board issued a procedural ruling regarding the order of evidence for challenges to the voters' list.

The Board directed that the applicant call its evidence first regarding three specific individuals, followed by the responding party's evidence.

The Board also set out the procedure for arguing a motion to bifurcate the proceeding.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging the responding party failed to make required contributions under the collective agreement.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into Minutes of Settlement wherein the responding party acknowledged the violation and agreed to pay $48,048.35 in damages, with post-dated cheques totalling $50,557.27 provided.

The Board issued a consent order incorporating the Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant employer filed an application for review of an Order to Pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The Ministry of Labour advised the Board that the investigation had not yet commenced and no determination had been made.

The Board terminated the proceeding, finding the application premature and noting that, in any event, an application for review is not properly made unless the applicant pays the amount of the order into trust as required by section 68(7) of the Act.