What is the effect of a bridging clause in a collective agreement?

The Board distinguished Paccar as follows, at paragraph 55 of its reasons: 55. The present panel is of the opinion that CAIMAW v. Paccar of Canada Ltd., supra, is different from the instant case, and therefore that it does not apply. Despite the fact that the collective agreement in that matter also included a bridging clause, the focus of that decision is on the employer's power to alter the terms and conditions of employment after the expiry of the collective agreement, after the employer had notified the union that it intended to discontinue negotiations, in accordance with the bridging clause agreed to by the parties. Of importance in that decision was the fact that, at the relevant time, the British Columbia Labour Relations Code did not specifically provide for a freeze period on the terms and conditions of employment after the expiry of a collective agreement. The analysis, therefore, does not include an interpretation of the effects of the bridging clause; it rather addresses what should take place after the freeze period that was held pursuant to the bridging clause itself.