Decision 63282
Full Text of Decision 63282
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
The Commission denied benefits to the claimant for participating in a labour dispute by not crossing the picket line. The Umpire stated that when employees voluntarily honour a picket line they are presumed to be participating in a labour dispute, unless there is evidence of a threat of violence or that there was no work for the employees if they had crossed the picket line. The judge found that the presumption that the claimant voluntarily participated in the labour dispute was rebutted by the existence of a reasonable threat of violence.
Decision A-0552.00
Full Text of Decision A-0552.00
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Before deciding whether the existence of an essential services order (ESO) that prevented the claimant from working proves that the claimant was not participating in a labour dispute, it seems relevant to consider the conduct of the claimant and her bargaining agent in the period preceding the issue of the ESO. In the present case, evidence showed the interest that Local 15 and its members had in Local 1004's labour dispute with the common employer, the coordinated bargaining strategies of and the ongoing communications between the two Locals and the opportunity that the applicant had to disassociate herself prior to the City's application for an ESO.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision 48786
Full Text of Decision 48786
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Although Locals 1004 and 15 may be separate unions pursuant to the provisions of the Code they can be described as sister unions working in harmony with each other and with CUPE (Canadian Union of Public Employees) National. Honouring picket lines is indeed a solidarity objective. Participation of Local 15 in negotiating the terms of the Essential Services Order would not have been necessary if the members of Local 15 were seriously prepared to return to work despite the existence of pickets.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision A-0838.91
Full Text of Decision A-0838.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Based on CUB 10182 the Board accepted that claimant's refusal to cross the picket line was prima facie proof that he was participating in the labour dispute between the employer and the iron workers. I have no right to interfere with this decision. No reviewable error by Umpire.
Decision 19037
Full Text of Decision 19037
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0270.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
annual shutdown |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision 20202
Full Text of Decision 20202
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0838.91
Decision 19033
Full Text of Decision 19033
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0269.91
Decision A-0270.91
Full Text of Decision A-0270.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Claimants advised by their union to honor the picket line. Should the disentitlement be discontinued when the employer, a few days later, shut down the project and laid them off? The question "Why were they unemployed after?" is irrelevant. No basis for ignoring IMBEAULT as per FC.
A genuine fear which would take a refusal to cross the picket line out of the characterization of participation is a matter of evidence for each claimant. The same facts giving rise to such fear in one case might not give rise to any in another. No reviewable error by Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
annual shutdown |
|
Decision A-0269.91
Full Text of Decision A-0269.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
The carpenters decided to honor the picket line and claimant refused to cross the lines to go to work. Had he done so the employer would have found something for him to do. Based on CUB 10182 this amounted to participation. The Umpire properly applied the relevant jurisprudence.
The only evidence that he feared for his safety was his remark about getting his head bashed in. That observation was completely unsupported by any objective evidence and in fact, if anything, was contradicted by the employer's evidence. No reviewable error by Umpire.
Decision 19034
Full Text of Decision 19034
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Whether or not they would honour the picket line was taken out of their hands when they discovered that the general contractor had shut the project down and he would not permit them on the work site. They did not reach the position of having to decide whether they would refuse.
Decision 16665
Full Text of Decision 16665
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Bricklayer who did not cross the picket line set up by carpenters employed by another subcontractor. There is no doubt that the Board's decision, that failure to cross amounts to participation, is correct in law and well founded on the basis of the facts before it.
Decision 15259
Full Text of Decision 15259
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
This is not a case of participation by refusing to cross a picket line. He was not given that choice by his employer nor told to attempt to do so when he presented himself at the work site, his employer not wishing his employees to be involved or concluding they would not cross.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
Decision 15114
Full Text of Decision 15114
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Trucker employed by sub-contractor for a company whose employees set up picket lines at one delivery point. Whether claimant would have crossed had his employer decided not to send him there is not known, but he did not voluntarily withdraw his services.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision 13820
Full Text of Decision 13820
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
There is a presumption that when one voluntarily honours a picket line, he or she is participating. Presumption rebutted if refusal to cross is due to a threat of violence or if there would be no work in any event. VALOIS and CARROZZELLA referred to.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
observations from the Commission |
|
|
| board of referees |
natural justice |
free of bias |
|
| board of referees |
hearings |
tape-recording |
|
Decision 13530
Full Text of Decision 13530
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
I am satisfied that these claimants would have been inviting injury to themselves or their property had they attempted to cross the picket line [p. 3]. The law does not require a claimant to actually suffer a physical assault in order to prove non-participation. [p. 5]
Decision S-0879.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
I concur with the following: "Not necessary to expose one's self to danger. Members of the same group must make a real effort to attend at work. However, if they cannot do so entirely safely because of violence or threats, they are not participants." [p. 14]
I concur with the following: "The purpose of the Act is to compensate those who have really tried to attend at work, see ss. 27 and 28. In the context of labour disputes, disentitlement applies also to everyone who supports the participants." [p. 13]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
Decision 11446
Full Text of Decision 11446
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
Service in cafeteria not needed during strike, so was advised the claimant's employer, a canteen operator, by struck company and claimant laid off. Even if claimant were thinking warm benedictions upon strikers, she can benefit of 31(2). You don't go tojail for what you think.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
Decision 10178
Full Text of Decision 10178
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
The most common form of participation is respecting picket lines. Not enough for claimant to speak for himself alone. He must prove grade or class held same bona fide fear. Only those persons themselves can testify as to their individual states of mind.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
Decision A-0373.82
Full Text of Decision A-0373.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
CUB 4222 quoted with approval: The test as to the personal motivation required to overcome the presumption is whether a bona fide worker, with a sincere desire to continue working, would not have attempted to cross the picket lines because he, with reasonable cause, truly feared actual violence.
CUB 4222 summarized what has been held in a long line of Umpire's decisions not questioned in FC or SC: failure to cross a picket line gives rise to a presumption of solidarity which may be rebutted by evidence to the contrary. [p.7]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
priority of law |
|
Decision A-0879.82
Full Text of Decision A-0879.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Summary:
I concur with the following: "Not necessary to expose one's self to danger. Members of the same group must make a real effort to attend at work. However, if they cannot do so entirely safely because of violence or threats, they are not participants." [p. 14]
I concur with the following: "The purpose of the Act is to compensate those who have really tried to attend at work, see ss. 27 and 28. In the context of labour disputes, disentitlement applies also to everyone who supports the participants." [p. 13]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
