R. I. Gallivan

The union filed an unfair labour practice complaint and a section 63 application alleging a sale of a business after the respondent terminated its property management contract with A.E. LePage and hired the former LePage employees directly to manage the project in-house.

The Board dismissed the unfair labour practice complaint, finding no anti-union animus in the respondent's decision to save management fees and offer enhanced wages to retain experienced staff.

However, the Board granted the section 63 application, concluding that the respondent's acquisition of the management expertise, administrative staff, and operational system constituted a sale of a part of LePage's business, thereby binding the respondent to the existing collective agreement.

During a hearing into an unfair labour practice complaint alleging the union bargained to impasse over a single collective agreement, the union sought production of the employer negotiator's notes to test his credibility regarding alleged strike threats.

The Board ordered partial production of the notes, balancing the union's right to make a full defence against the employer's right to maintain the secrecy of its negotiating strategy.

The Board restricted production to notes directly relevant to the alleged threats and the specific proposals at issue, excluding notes detailing the employer's broader bargaining strategy.