Labour Relations Board — Ontario Employment Law

B. v. Public Service Alliance Of Canada et al

This is an interlocutory proceeding addressing subject matter jurisdiction in a labour relations dispute. The court dismissed the action, finding that the Labour Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the union's internal disciplinary process and allegations of procedural unfairness under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.

W. v. Ontario Labour Relations Board et al

Judicial Review: Duty of Fair Representation & Union Bias

This is a judicial review application concerning the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decision to dismiss a duty of fair representation application. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the Board acted reasonably under the Vavilov standard regarding the union's withdrawal of a grievance, alleged bias, and sufficiency of reasons. The application for judicial review was dismissed.

P. v. Walmart Canada Corporation

Judicial Review of Labour Board Decision Dismissed

This is a judicial review application concerning the Ontario Labour Relations Board's dismissal of an appeal for delay and denial of reconsideration. The Divisional Court found the Board's decisions reasonable and procedurally fair, strictly enforcing statutory time limits and denying the admission of fresh evidence. The application was dismissed, and costs of $500 were awarded to the employer.

A. & F. Di Carlo Construction Inc. v. S.

Judicial Review: OLRB Wage Order

The Divisional Court reviewed an employer's application for judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board order directing the payment of wages. The Board had found that the employer was liable for standby pay owed to an employee who declined a call-in, and the Court considered the Board's findings of fact and credibility.

L. v. Ontario Labour Relations Board

Judicial Review: Duty of Fair Representation & Extension of Time

This is a judicial review application concerning the Ontario Labour Relations Board's dismissal of a complaint alleging a union failed in its duty of fair representation. The applicant sought an extension of time to file a motion to set aside a motion judge's decision, which had previously denied an extension of time for the judicial review. The court addressed issues regarding the standard of review for discretionary decisions, the admissibility of fresh evidence, and the merit of the underlying application.

CTS (ASDE) Inc. v. Labourers’ International Union of North America et al

Judicial Review: Unjust Dismissal & Discrimination

This is a judicial review application brought by an employer challenging a Labour Relations Board decision that found an employee's dismissal unjust and influenced by racial discrimination. The Board had determined that race was a factor in the termination despite the employer's allegations of just cause based on workplace incidents and insubordination. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the Board's findings on just cause and discrimination were reasonable under the Vavilov framework.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v. Aecon Group Inc.

Judicial Review: Mootness in OHSA Crane Certification Case

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board concerning workplace health and safety obligations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the application was moot because the construction project was completed and no practical remedy remained, and whether to exercise its discretion to hear the case. The Court also reviewed the Board's interpretation that overhead crane operators require specific training and certification under the relevant regulations.

J. v. Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation

Judicial Review: Union Duty of Fair Representation

This is a judicial review application concerning the Ontario Labour Relations Board's dismissal of a complaint against the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation for breach of the duty of fair representation. The Divisional Court assessed the reasonableness of the Board's decisions regarding summary dismissal for delay and failure to establish a prima facie case.

M. v. Aramark Food Services Ltd.

Judicial Review: Labour Board Finality & Extension of Time

This is a judicial review application concerning the finality of Labour Board decisions from 2015 and 2016. The applicant sought an extension of time to challenge these decisions seven years later, citing disability-related delays and alleged fresh evidence from recovered memories. The Divisional Court reviewed the application, finding the delay inordinate and unjustifiable, and holding that generalized assertions of fresh recollections were insufficient to disturb the final decisions.

Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183 v. The Daniels Group Inc.

Judicial Review: Union Certification Dismissal

This is a judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision dismissing a union certification application. The Divisional Court examined whether the Board reasonably exercised its discretion under s. 128.1(13) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, to decline ordering a representation vote due to the absence of a reliable denominator for support levels. The Court upheld the Board's decision, finding the reasons coherent and justified.

Cambridge Pallet Ltd. v. P.

Workplace Reprisal: OHSA Judicial Review Dismissed

This is a judicial review of a Labour Relations Board decision concerning a workplace reprisal under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Divisional Court dismissed the application, upholding the Board's finding that the termination related to health and safety complaints and that the employer did not meet its onus.

C. v. Ontario Labour Relations Board

Judicial Review: Reprisal Dismissal & OHSA Rights

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board concerning an applicant's allegation that their dismissal was a reprisal for exercising workplace health and safety rights. The Divisional Court reviewed the matter, finding no breach of procedural fairness, no bias, and that the Board's determination of no causal connection between the safety concerns and termination was reasonable.

2317945 Ontario Inc. carrying on business as KD Poultry v. L., 2021

Judicial Review: Farm Worker Exemption Under ESA

This is a judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision concerning the applicability of the farm worker exemption under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The Divisional Court upheld the Board's reasonable interpretation that the exemption did not apply to poultry service workers providing services to multiple farms, thereby excluding them from the exemption.

ASL Agrodrain Limited v. International Union of Operating Engineers

Judicial Review of Union Certification Decision

An employer sought judicial review of the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decision certifying a union as the bargaining agent for heavy equipment operators. The Divisional Court reviewed the Board's decision, finding that the imposition of specific pleading requirements and the refusal to allow amendment of pleadings did not deny procedural fairness or constitute an error in certification based on card counts.

A. v. Eamon Park Housing Cooperative Inc.

Judicial Review: OHSA Reprisal Dismissal Upheld

This is a judicial review of the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decision dismissing the applicant's reprisal claim under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard and upheld the Tribunal's findings, determining that the employer's actions were good faith exercises of authority and not reprisals for workplace safety complaints.

M. v. Ontario Labour Relations Board

Judicial Review: Duty of Fair Representation

This is a judicial review of the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decisions dismissing an applicant's claims against a union for withdrawing a grievance. The Divisional Court assessed whether the Board's decisions regarding the union's duty of fair representation were reasonable and procedurally fair.

M. v. Ontario Labour Relations Board

Appeal: Duty of Fair Representation

This appeal concerned a judicial review application challenging the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decision to dismiss the applicant's claim that his union breached its duty of fair representation. The Divisional Court dismissed the application. The appeal addressed whether the Board's decision regarding the union's handling of grievances and settlement was reasonable and procedurally fair.

S. & T. Electrical Contractors Limited v. Iron Workers District Council of Ontario

This is a judicial review application concerning the Labour Relations Board's advisory opinion and procedural fairness under the Labour Relations Act, 1995. The Divisional Court found that the Board's opinion was not reviewable as it did not determine legal rights and that any procedural errors did not prejudice the outcome.

FCI Concrete Forming Inc. v. Buttcon Limited

Labour Relations Board Exclusive Jurisdiction Appeal

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision staying a civil action. The plaintiff employers sued a union and a contractor for conspiracy to injure. The motion judge stayed the action, finding that the essence of the dispute was an alleged unfair labour practice over which the Labour Relations Board had exclusive jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing that the statement of claim's allegations, such as an improper union grievance, were labour relations matters for the Board to determine. The stay of the civil action stands.

Labourers International Union of North America, Local 183

Judicial Review: Union Jurisdictional Dispute Upheld

This is a judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision concerning a jurisdictional dispute over the assignment of exterior concrete formwork work on a construction project. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the Board reasonably concluded that the Labourers’ ICI Collective Agreement did not establish a claim to the disputed work and whether the Board’s interpretation of the agreement and relevant factors was reasonable. The Court found that the Board’s decision was reasonable under the Dunsmuir standard and upheld the Board's finding that the collective agreement did not grant the claim.