Lethbridge casino accused of unionbusting

Last April, the Alberta Labour Relations Board issued a certificate to the workers employed by Pure Casino Gaming Corp. in their Lethbridge casino.

As a result, these 150 or so workers are now members of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, and they represent the second unionized location owned by this employer.

Pure Casino Gaming Group, which is based out of Edmonton, operates 4 casinos in Alberta: 2 in Edmonton and 1 each in Calgary and Lethbridge. Pure Casino Gaming, in turn, is owned by ONCAP, a mid-market private equity platform of Onex, which is itself a Toronto-based investment management company.

AUPE originally filed for union certification back in December 2024, but it took do long to be certified because of an allegation that Pure Gaming had “arbitrarily” disciplined one of their Lethbridge workers because of “their membership in the Union”, “their support for the Union’s certification application”, and “their participation in the certification process”.

Well, it seems as though they are at it again.

Earlier this month, AUPE filed another application with the ALRB alleging Pure Gaming of unionbusting. Well, technically, they never used that term explicitly, but let me demonstrate why it is an accurate term.

According to the application summary provided by ALRB in last week’s new applications report, Pure Gaming terminated the employment of Brandi Thorne.

She was an “active and vocal” promoter of the union, and her fellow workers had democratically elected her to their bargaining team. She also testified at a hearing with the ALRB regarding unionization.

I want to point out bargaining for the first collective agreement for these workers began only last month.

AUPE claim that her dismissal was done on purpose, as a way to “punish” here, to “intimidate other employees”, and to “delegitimize collective bargaining, lawful union activity, union representation, and undermine the credibility of the union and the collective bargaining process”.

They also argue that in the two meetings Pure Gaming held with Thorne last month (the 14th and the 26th), they “deprived” her of her right to union representation.

The application summary notes that AUPE proposes that Pure Gaming’s actions toward Thorne violated several sections of Alberta’s Labour Relations Code.

No employer or employers’ organization and no person acting on behalf of an employer or employers’ organization shall participate in or interfere with the formation or administration of a trade union, or the representation of employees by a trade union,

Labour Relations Code, 148.1.a.i and 148.1.a.ii

No employer or employers’ organization and no person acting on behalf of an employer or employers’ organization shall refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person or discriminate against any person in regard to employment or any term or condition of employment because the person is a member of a trade union or an applicant for membership in a trade union, has indicated in writing the person’s selection of a trade union to be the bargaining agent on the person’s behalf, or has testified or otherwise participated in or may testify or otherwise participate in a proceeding under this Act,

Labour Relations Code, 149.1.a.i, 149.1.a.ii, and 149.1.a.iv

No employer or employers’ organization and no person acting on behalf of an employer or employers’ organization shall impose any condition in a contract of employment that restrains, or has the effect of restraining, an employee from exercising any right conferred on the employee by this Act; or seek by intimidation, dismissal, threat of dismissal or any other kind of threat, by the imposition of a pecuniary or other penalty or by any other means, to compel an employee to refrain from becoming or to cease to be a member, officer or representative of a trade union;

Labour Relations Code, 149.1.b and 149.1.c

No employer or employers’ organization and no person acting on behalf of an employer or employers’ organization shall discriminate against a person in regard to employment or membership in a trade union or intimidate or threaten to dismiss or in any other manner coerce a person or impose a pecuniary or other penalty on a person, because the person has testified or otherwise participated in or may testify or otherwise participate in a proceeding authorized or permitted under a collective agreement or a proceeding under this Act,

Labour Relations Code, 149.1.g.i

The labour board has not yet scheduled a hearing for this application.

Because the ALRB does not archive their new application reports, I have included a copy of last week’s report below.