****Please read the question thoroughly and answer***

**** Definitely gonna give a thumbs up if done nicely.Thank you*****

For a number of years, the Employer hosted an annual Christmas luncheon for all bargaining unit and non-bargaining unit employees. It is a catered dinner planned by some managers and some office staff for all bargaining unit and non-bargaining unit employees each year. A notice of the date and time of the luncheon is usually posted at the workplace along with a request for employees to contact one of the office staff to confirm their attendance.In January 2016 the union had a lengthy strike lasting approximately 3 months. Subsequently in December management posted notice of the Christmas luncheon in the usual fashion. In addition, a number of managers asked a number of employees whether they were planning to attend the Christmas dinner. Some employees may have been asked by more than one manager. The dinner went ahead as usual. Following the dinner, there had been a rumour in the workplace that some employees had been harassed by co-workers for having attended the event. Specifically, they were called suck holes for having attended. On December 20, 2016, the Employer posted a notice to employees in order to address the rumour. The notice said:

NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES

Following the Christmas Luncheon last week, there was an extremely unsettling rumor that some employees had been harassed by co-workers for attending the event which was hosted by members of the Employer. This event is intended to express our appreciation to all of you for your hard work and commitment during the year. To have it marred by such appalling conduct is extremely unfortunate. As all employees are aware, any form of harassment in our workplace is not acceptable and will not be tolerated. It is the right of every employee to have a workplace free from bullying and harassment. When such rights are not respected, it must be dealt with in a firm manner. Therefore, should it come to our attention that any employee or group of employees was involved in this or any other form of workplace harassment or bullying, appropriate disciplinary measures will be taken in accordance with our policies on Workplace Harassment and Anti-Bullying.For more information on our workplace policies, please check the website under the OH&S section or contact Human Resources.

Management

Three weeks after the Employer posted its letter, the President of the Union posted a copy of a letter from him to the General Manager on the Unions locked bulletin boards. In it, he alleged that bargaining unit employees had been harassed by management to compel them to attend the Christmas dinner. The letter said: January 13, 2017

Attention: General Manager Re: Notice to Employees I write in relation to the Notice to Employees you posted on December 20, 2016. It is extremely irresponsible for you to engage in such conduct on the basis of what you admit are nothing more than rumours. It is clear that the Commission had no factual basis for such allegations, and the Notice merely represents a clumsy attempt to disrupt the union membership. Furthermore, on behalf of the members I wish to formally object to the manner in which employees were harassed by management seeking to compel employees to attend the Christmas Luncheon. Employees felt pressured and intimidated to attend although they did not want to be present. If the workplace is to be free of harassment, management should set an example and not engage in the very behavior which you claim to be trying to prevent.

Sincerely, Union President

On the same day, the Employer posted a second notice to all employees at the workplace. That notice said:

NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES

I refer to the letter of January 13, 2017, from the Union President, to the General Manager, that has been posted on the Union bulletin boards. I wish to clarify the purpose of the December 20, 2016, Notice to Employees. Under the provincial Occupational Health and Safety legislation, your employer, has a general duty to safeguard the health, safety and welfare of employees. This includes addressing any issues of possible harassment in our workplace. As outlined in the letter of January 13, 2017, the Union does not support the Employer in its stand on possible workplace intimidation and bullying and has chosen instead to publicly criticize our efforts to put an end to this type of harmful conduct. We remain committed to our position that any form of harassment in our workplace is not acceptable and will not be tolerated. It is the right of every employee to have a workplace free from bullying and harassment. For more information on the workplace policies, please check the website under the OH&S section or contact Human Resources.

Manager, Human Resources

On January 23, 2017, the General Manager met with the Union President and discussed his January 13 letter. In particular, the General Manager gave the Union President ten days to provide documented proof of the truth of the harassment allegations or to issue a written public apology to management to be posted on all Union bulletin boards at the workplace. During the 10 day period, the Union President refused to provide such proof or a written apology. By way of a letter dated February 3, 2017, the Employer, issued the Union President a suspension for one week without pay for his disrespectful behavior directed towards management, including his publicly displayed statements, his failure to comply with the direction of January 23, 2017 and his violation of the harassment policy.

In addition to filing a grievance regarding the suspension, the Union brought an application to the Labour Relations Board requesting the following: 1. a. The Board find the actions of the Employer in threatening and imposing discipline on the Union President and accusing the Union President of libel, are unfair labour practices in violations of Section 23(1), 25(1) and 25(2) of the Act; b. On January 13, 2017 the employer responded to a letter from the Union President that was posted in the union bulletin board. The union alleges this letter is an unfair labour practice.

Assume you are the Chairperson of the Labour Relations Board and have been asked to rule on the unions submission (a-b). How would you rule on the unions application? Please explain your position in relation to the relevant section of the Labour Relations Act.

2. Assume that the employer threatened to prohibit the union from accessing union bulletin boards until the union president issued an apology, would this be considered an unfair labour practice in violations of Section 23(1), 25(1) and 25(2) of the Act. Please explain your position.

Relevant Sections of the NL Labour Relations Act Unfair labour practices

23. (1) An employer or employers' organization, and a person acting on behalf of an employer or employers' organization, shall not (a) participate in or interfere with the selection, formation or administration of a trade union; or (b) contribute financial or other support to a trade union. (2) An employer shall not be held to contravene subsection (1) by reason only that the employer Prohibitions relating to employers 25. (1) An employer and a person acting on behalf of an employer shall not seek by intimidation, threat of dismissal or other kind of threat, or by the imposition of a monetary or other penalty or by other means to compel a person to refrain from becoming or to stop being a member, officer or representative of a trade union or to refrain from (a) testifying or otherwise participating in a proceeding under this Act or other law; (b) making a disclosure that he or she may be required to make in a proceeding under this Act or other law; (c) making an application or filing a complaint under this Act or other law; or (d) exercising another right under this Act or other law. (2) An employer shall not (a) discriminate against a person in regard to employment or conditions of employment; or (b) suspend, discharge or impose a financial or other penalty on a person employed by him or her or take other disciplinary action against that person, because of that person having become a member, officer or representative of a trade union or his or her having done any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (d). (3) A person, whether or not he or she is an employer, shall not seek by intimidation or coercion to compel an employee to become or refrain from becoming or stop being a member of a trade union. (4) Nothing in this section prevents an employer from expressing his or her views so long as the employer does not use coercion, intimidation, threats, promises or undue influence.