The union brought an application alleging that the responding party was a successor employer following the purchase of a bankrupt company's rubber division.
The responding party raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the union's bargaining rights did not extend to its location in Elora, Ontario.
The Board found that the union and the predecessor employer had attempted to amend the collective agreement to expand its geographic scope in the event of a sale, but this arrangement effectively created two collective agreements or altered the term of operation without Board consent, violating the Labour Relations Act, 1995.
Consequently, the geographic scope clause did not cover the Elora location, and the application was dismissed.
