7 total
Application for judicial review dismissed; arbitrator's reinstatement of temporary employee upheld as reasonable despite errors.
Canada Post Corporation applied for judicial review of an arbitration award that reinstated a temporary employee dismissed for failing to demonstrate reasonable availability.
The arbitrator found the dismissal unjustified, introducing a requirement for corporate prejudice.
The Divisional Court held that while the arbitrator failed to follow established arbitral jurisprudence and impermissibly amended the collective agreement by requiring corporate prejudice, his ultimate conclusion that the dismissal was unreasonable remained defensible on the facts.
The application for judicial review was dismissed, with one judge dissenting.
Tribunal declines to dismiss disability discrimination claim regarding withholding of pension commuted value.
The applicant alleged that the respondents discriminated against him on the basis of disability by refusing to pay out the commuted value of his pension while his employment status remained in dispute due to an outstanding human rights application.
The respondents requested that the application be dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success and for delay.
The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application, finding that the issues of adverse effect discrimination were more appropriately determined on a full evidentiary record, and that the application was filed within the one-year limitation period.
Arbitrator's decision to issue a province-wide collective agreement in the residential construction sector was reasonable.
The union and the employers' association failed to reach a new collective agreement for the residential construction sector.
An arbitrator was appointed under the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
The employers' association argued the arbitrator's jurisdiction was limited to the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), while the union argued for a province-wide award.
The arbitrator determined he had jurisdiction to make a province-wide award to avoid fracturing the bargaining unit.
The Divisional Court quashed the award for areas outside the GTA.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that the standard of review for the arbitrator's jurisdictional decision was reasonableness.
The Court found the arbitrator's decision was reasonable and restored the province-wide award.
Human rights application alleging racial discrimination and reprisal dismissed for no reasonable prospect of success.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race and reprisal by her former employer.
She claimed her line manager harassed her after hiring a relative or friend of the same race, and that she was terminated after complaining to the franchise owner.
The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding no reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal concluded there was no evidence linking the alleged harassment to the applicant's race, and the reprisal claim failed because the applicant had not claimed or enforced her rights under the Code prior to her termination.
Application for judicial review of arbitration award striking down pre-access drug testing dismissed as reasonable.
The applicant sought judicial review of an arbitration award that declared pre-access alcohol and drug testing, implemented in response to Suncor's site access requirements, violated the collective agreement.
The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review and upheld the arbitrator's decision, which relied on the Supreme Court of Canada's framework in Irving Pulp & Paper.
The court found the arbitrator reasonably concluded there was no evidence of a substance abuse problem at the Sarnia worksite to justify the privacy intrusion of pre-access testing.
The application for judicial review was dismissed.
Judicial review of interest arbitration award dismissed; arbitrator's procedural and disclosure rulings were fair and reasonable.
The applicant union sought judicial review of an interest arbitration award, arguing the arbitrator denied procedural fairness by failing to disclose a dispute over the cost of a step progression freeze, making a finding without evidence, and refusing to order production of certain financial source documents.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the arbitrator's procedures and disclosure rulings were reasonable given the flexible and informal nature of interest arbitration.
The court also found there was sufficient evidence in the parties' briefs to support the arbitrator's findings on the cost of the step progression freeze.
Human rights application deferred pending resolution of parallel union grievance to avoid conflicting factual determinations.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal regarding disability accommodation by his employer and several individuals.
The respondents requested that the application be deferred because the applicant's union had filed grievances regarding the same matters.
The Tribunal found that although the remaining grievance alleged a breach of the collective agreement rather than a Code violation, the arbitrator had the jurisdiction to apply human rights law, and deferral was appropriate to avoid conflicting factual determinations.
The request to defer was granted.
