The City of Vancouver did not breach its duty to bargain in good faith by failing to disclose budget plans that later led to layoffs, the British Columbia Labour Relations Board has ruled, dismissing a complaint brought by the union that represents its inside workers.
The Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 15 had argued the city violated British Columbia’s Labour Relations Code by withholding, during 2025 collective bargaining, a decision that would significantly affect bargaining unit members. The union framed the issue as the employer’s “decision to eliminate departments and lay off dozens or hundreds of bargaining unit employees,” which it tied to a decision to hold property taxes flat. The city denied any breach, saying the budget decision rested with city council and was not made until after bargaining had concluded.
The board agreed with the employer and dismissed the application on the written materials, finding it could decide the matter without a hearing.
Budget process and bargaining ran on parallel tracks
The city served notice to bargain in January 2025, and the parties met regularly from March through July. Early in the process, the union asked the employer to identify any initiatives that would “negatively impact the bargaining unit members.” The union acknowledged it knew the city faced budgetary pressures and did not treat its own layoff and recall proposals as a priority.
The parties reached a tentative agreement in August 2025. Union members ratified it on Sept. 11, and the employer ratified it on Sept. 16.
The city’s budget planning unfolded alongside those talks. In June 2025, council directed administrators to prepare three scenarios based on property tax increases of zero, 1.5 and 2.5 per cent. The employer told the union during bargaining that a budget with no property tax increase was one of the scenarios under consideration, and shared a memorandum citing “significant financial pressures.”
A motion directing staff to build a draft budget on a zero per cent tax increase was previewed on Sept. 15, one day before the employer ratified the collective agreement, and passed by council on Oct. 8. Council approved the final budget with no tax increase on Nov. 25. The employer gave the union formal notice the next day that “a significant number of [the union’s] positions across the City … will be eliminated.”
Board rejects union’s ‘de facto decision’ argument
The union argued the city had effectively decided to freeze taxes — and therefore to cut jobs — during the summer of 2025. It said the board should infer from circumstantial evidence that the decision predated the end of bargaining. The union pointed to the city’s handling of a public tax survey, the departure of the city manager in July, and what it said was a rush to conclude talks before potential labour disruption during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. It argued it lost the chance to negotiate terms that could “soften the blow” of workforce reductions.
The board found the duty to bargain in good faith includes an obligation to disclose, on a party’s own initiative, decisions already made that could have a major impact on the bargaining unit. That obligation, it noted, does not extend to plans that are not yet decided. Drawing on decisions from labour boards across the country, the board said a “de facto decision” requires a high degree of certainty — one that is “sufficiently certain that one can say the decision has effectively been made” — and is more than serious consideration of options that may never be adopted.
The board accepted, without deciding, that the mayor formed an intention not to raise property taxes in the summer of 2025. But it found the mayor is not the employer and cannot unilaterally set the tax rate or the budget. Under the Vancouver Charter, only council can pass a budget, and the union acknowledged the mayor needed political support to do so.
The board declined to draw the inferences the union sought from the three pieces of circumstantial evidence, finding no factual basis to conclude the city had concealed a decision. It noted the employer continued preparing for all three budget scenarios into mid-September, and that other outcomes remained possible until council acted.
The board determined the decision affecting the bargaining unit was made when council passed the 2026 budget on Nov. 25, 2025 — well after bargaining concluded. It also found the disclosure obligation was met in substance, because the union knew throughout bargaining that a budget with no property tax increase was a live possibility.
The application was dismissed.
Counsel for Plaintiff
Susanna Allevato Quail and Katherine Benson, for the Union (Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 15)
Counsel for Defendant
Adriana F. Wills, for the Employer (City of Vancouver)
Decision Maker
Paul Todd, Vice-Chair, British Columbia Labour Relations Board.
For more information, see City of Vancouver, 2026 BCLRB 125 (CanLII).
