The applicant union alleged that the respondent was a successor employer under section 63 of the Labour Relations Act after the original employer, Hoco Limited, contracted out the management of its hotel restaurants to the respondent.
The respondent was responsible for hiring and supervising staff and received a percentage of sales or profits, but Hoco retained ownership, control of revenues, and decision-making power over prices and hours.
The Board found that the arrangement was a contracting out of services rather than a transfer of a functional economic vehicle or part of a business.
The application was dismissed.
