Representative experience

February 2022

Herbert successfully argued that four individuals were employed by our client therefor resulting in the dismissal of an Application for Certification against a construction employer.

January 2022

Herbert successfully defended a grievance in arbitration where the Union alleged that the Employer incorrectly calculated payments to employees.  Herbert successfully argued that the Employer’s interpretation of the collective agreement and its calculation of payments were correct thereby saving the employer thousands of dollars of potential liability.

July 2021

Herbert successfully defended a construction manager against an application for certification where the union alleged that workers supplied by an agency were employees of our client.  Ultimately, the union withdrew its application and our client remains union free.

September 2019

Herbert successfully defended an employer against allegations that it supported a union decertification application. Ultimately, the union was unsuccessful and was decertified.

August 2019

After a union seized and occupied an employer’s facility, Herbert Law successfully argued before the Ontario Labour Relations Board to obtain an order to stop the illegal occupation. Herbert was able to obtain this order less than 48 hours after the union occupied the facility.

July 2018

Herbert successfully defended a large manufacturing company from a Sale of Business application filed by the Union. The Union claimed that our manufacturing client should be bound to its collective agreement because it leased a space formerly occupied by a union company that performed the same work as our client and utilized the same machinery. The Board held that a Sale of Business did not occur and dismissed the Union’s application therefore allowing our client to conduct its business union free.

May 2018

Herbert successfully defended a large construction general contractor from an Application for Certification by a construction trade union. The trade union claimed that our client employed employees performing work falling under the trade union’s scope. Herbert was able to demonstrate that the work performed by an employee fell within the scope of another trade union. Accordingly, the Board found that the trade union did not have the requisite support and dismissed the Union’s application.

May 2017

Herbert Law successfully defended a mechanical contractor against allegations that it supported a union decertification application. The decertification application against the union was ultimately successful.

November 2016

Herbert Law successfully defended an employer against allegations that it was related to another unionized employer so that it can continue to operate in a non-union basis.

May 2016

Herbert Law successfully defended an application for certification and allegations of unfair labour practice filed against an electrical contractor.

March 2016

Herbert Law successfully defended an application for certification filed against a sheet metal contractor.

October 2015

Herbert Law successfully defended a developer in a construction industry application for certification. Despite the fact that the developer was unaware that the application was filed against it, Herbert successfully convinced the Labour Board to accept its response which ultimately resulted in the Union’s withdrawal of the application.

September 2015

Herbert Law successfully defended a large mining company from complex allegations of unfair labour practice and an application for interim relief. Under very tight time lines imposed by the Labour Board, Herbert, Jim McKeown, and Sarah Smith prepared extensive submissions and filings which ultimately led to the Union withdrawing all allegations against the client.

January 2014

Herbert Law successfully defended a manufacturing employer in a series of complex applications before the labour board that included an interim reinstatement application, unfair labour practice complaint seeking remedial certification, and an application for certification. Ultimately, the union withdrew all its application and the union was barred from applying to certify the employer for one year.

November 2013

Herbert Law successfully defended an employer in an application for certification where the union claimed that employees of a labour supply company were employees of the employer. Herbert successfully presented evidence and submissions to convince the Labour Board that the employees subject to the certification application were not employed by our client but were actually employed by the labour supply company.

October 2013

Herbert Law successfully defended a client in an application for certification and unfair labour practice complaint where the union sought remedial certification. In this case the union surreptitiously recorded our client. Herbert successfully impeached the evidence brought by the union in cross examination which ultimately resulted in the union withdrawing its application for certification and unfair labour practice complaint.

September 2012

Walter Thornton and Herbert Law successfully persuaded the Ontario Labour Relations Board to rescind a certificate issued against a major contractor where a trade union delivered an Application for Certification to an office that was not utilized by the contractor and the contractor was unaware of the Application being filed

September 2012

Herbert Law successfully defended an Application for Certification before the Ontario Labour Relations Board filed against a contractor who inadvertently hired employees directly from the union hiring hall

December 2011

Facing an impending strike, Herbert Law assisted a social service employer negotiate with a large public sector union to settle a fiscally responsible collective agreement that will ensure the employer’s financial viability.

September 2011

Mathews Dinsdale successfully obtained temporary foreign worker permits for many highly specialized workers for a major foreign contractor engaged in the construction of a very important infrastructure project in Ontario. — Counsel: Herbert Law

August 2011

After failing to file a Response to an Application for Certification within the stipulated time limits, an unrepresented Employer faced all-but-inevitable union certification without the opportunity to make submissions. After retaining Mathews Dinsdale, the Employer won a decisive motion before the Labour Board which resulted in the Union withdrawing its Application for Certification. — Counsel: Herbert Law

March 2011

March 2011 – Herbert Law successfully argued before an Adjudicator appointed under the unjust termination provisions of the Canada Labour Code that the termination of a coordinator who fraudulently claimed travel allowance and other expenses ought to be sustained.

March 2011

March 2011 – Herbert Law successfully argued before the WSIB that franchisees were not workers pursuant to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act. Accordingly, the company was not required to remit WSIB premiums related to the work performed by franchisees.

November 2010

November 2010 – Herbert Law successfully argued before the Ontario Labour Relations Board that an independent contractor was not an employee, resulting in the successful defence of a certification application.

October 2010

October 2010 – Herbert Law successfully argued before the Ontario Labour Relations Board that the operation of a vacuum truck at a road construction site was not work within the construction industry resulting in the successful defence in a certification application.

Industry recognition

Canadian Legal Lexpert®

Labour Relations – Management

Presentations

News

Insights

Events