Ontario Labour Relations Board

The applicant applied to terminate the bargaining rights of the responding party trade 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with no statements of desire to make representations filed, the Ontario Labour Relations Board declared that the union no longer represents the employees of the intervenor employer.

The applicant filed an application alleging a violation of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The responding union argued that the application was premature because the underlying grievances were still moving through the collective agreement's grievance procedure.

The Board directed the applicant to provide written submissions explaining why the Board should not decline to inquire into the application on the basis of prematurity, deferring consideration of the union's motion to dismiss for failure to disclose a prima facie case.

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

After being directed to serve the responding party union and the employer, the applicant informed the Board that the union office was unmanned.

The Board directed the applicant to serve the union by registered mail and notify the Board.

The applicant filed a complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, alleging that his supervisor refused to allow him to visit the First Aid station for an injury sustained at home, and that he was escorted out of the plant after refusing to continue working.

The responding party argued the application failed to establish a prima facie case.

The Board dismissed the application under Rule 46 of its Rules of Procedure, finding that even if all alleged facts were true, there was no assertion that the applicant was disciplined for acting in compliance with or seeking to enforce the Act.

The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The Board ordered the adjournment, noting that the matters would be deemed terminated if no party requested to proceed within that time.

In an unfair labour practice complaint under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, both parties requested the production of particulars and documents.

The Board directed mutual production by a specified date and ordered the applicant to deliver pleadings from related files to the responding party.

The Board also granted the responding party an extension of time to file its response.

The applicant union filed an application with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

On consent of the parties, the Board amended the style of cause to reflect the correct name of the responding party and adjourned the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The application will be deemed terminated if no party requests to proceed within that time.

The applicant 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 Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed, with $550.83 returned to the employer and the $100 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The matter was deemed terminated subject to the Ministry of Labour's right to request a hearing.

The applicant filed a timely application under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 for a declaration terminating the responding party union's bargaining rights.

Finding that at least forty percent of the employees in the bargaining unit expressed a wish not to be represented by the union, the Board directed a representation vote.

The Board declined the union's request to dismiss the application without a hearing or vote under section 63(16) and ordered that the ballot box not be sealed.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a July 13, 2001 decision that dismissed his application for review under the Employment Standards Act regarding an alleged constructive dismissal.

The Board declined to consider the request because it was filed more than 20 days after the decision without an explanation or request for an extension, contrary to Rule 96 of the Board's Rules of Procedure.

The Board also noted that even if timely, the request would have been denied as it merely disagreed with the original conclusion without providing compelling reasons.

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

The Board found that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, and that not less than forty percent of the individuals in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the union at the time the application was made.

The Board ordered a representation vote to be held on September 10, 2001.

The applicant union sought to change its position regarding the exclusion of journeyman and apprentice plumbers and pipefitters from the bargaining unit, despite having previously agreed to their exclusion during the certification process.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to allow the applicant to depart from its agreed position, noting that taking advantage of an oversight by the opposing party or the tribunal is considered sharp practice.

The Board reconsidered its previous decision and amended the bargaining unit description to explicitly exclude the disputed trades, directing the applicant to return the original certificate.

The applicant union sought pre-hearing production of documents in a related employer and sale of a business application under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The parties agreed to adjourn a related certification application pending the disposition of this matter.

The Board ordered the responding parties to produce or make available the requested documents, or to list any documents they object to producing along with the basis for their objection.

The United Steelworkers of America applied for certification as the bargaining agent for employees of Stellarc Precision Bar Inc. 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 issued a certificate to the applicant.

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

The responding party filed a timely response and a notice under section 8.1, asserting it employs carpenters in a different Board Area than the one listed in the application.

The Board found that the applicant appeared to have the requisite membership support and directed a representation vote for the proposed bargaining unit, with the ballot boxes to be sealed pending resolution of the bargaining unit dispute.

The employer and employee filed cross-applications for review of an Employment Standards Officer's Order to Pay.

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held in trust by the Director to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $1,500 paid to the employee and $1,774.16 returned to the employer.

The employee's application was withdrawn.

The applicant filed an application under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act based on allegations from 1991.

The responding party requested the application be dismissed for delay, res judicata, and abuse of process, noting a previous 1997 Board decision terminating an application based on the same facts.

The Board ordered the applicant to advise within five days if he disputes the employer's facts, failing which the application will be terminated.

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

The employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement, agreeing to disburse the funds held in trust by the Director, with the majority returning to the employer and a portion retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds disbursed in accordance with the settlement and terminated the application pursuant to section 69.1(5) of the Act.

The applicant sought a review under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered the funds held by the Director in trust to be disbursed in accordance with the settlement, with $900.00 paid to the employee and $857.20 returned to the employer.

The matter was deemed terminated subject to any request by the Ministry of Labour to relist.

The applicant filed an application under section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, alleging that the union violated section 74.

The union asserted that the application failed to disclose a prima facie violation and requested that the Board dismiss it without a hearing.

After providing the applicant an opportunity to respond, the Board declined to dismiss the matter and directed it to a consultation hearing.