On March 3, 2016, Bill 163, Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder), 2016, passed second reading and was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Policy. As previously reported, if passed, Bill 163 will, among other things, amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 to create a rebuttable statutory presumption in favour of granting workers’ compensation…
Author: Hicks Morley
2016 Ontario Budget and Budget Bill Released
On February 25, 2016, the Ontario government tabled its 2016 Budget “Jobs for Today and Tomorrow” (“Budget”) and the corresponding Budget Bill, Bill 173, Jobs for Today and Tomorrow Act (Budget Measures), 2016 (“Bill 173”), supporting omnibus legislation designed to implement some of the proposals contained in the Budget. Our FTR Now of February 29, 2016, “Ontario Budget 2016”…
Disclosure of Disability Post-Termination Won’t Negate Dismissal for Cause
Is an employer obligated to set aside the termination of an employee if the employee subsequently discloses a disability? The Ontario Court of Appeal has seemingly answered this question in the case of Bellehumeur v. Windsor Factory Supply Ltd. and provided clarity to employers regarding their ability to discipline inappropriate workplace conduct perpetrated by employees who suffer…
Ontario Introduces PTSD Legislation
On February 18, 2016, the Ontario government introduced Bill 163, Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder), 2016. If passed, Bill 163 will, among other things, amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 to create a rebuttable statutory presumption in favour of granting workers’ compensation benefits to certain workers diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. If passed, Bill…
Court Recognizes New Privacy Tort: “Public Disclosure of Embarrassing Private Facts”
In a case that can only add to the risk of privacy claims faced by organizations, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently awarded damages based on the new tort of “public disclosure of embarrassing private facts.” In Doe 464533 v N.D., the Court awarded damages to a plaintiff whose former boyfriend coaxed her to…
Court of Appeal Rejects Use of “Snapshot” Approach to Determine Exclusivity in Contractor Relationships
Employment relationships generally fall into one of three categories: employee, dependent contractor or independent contractor. Exclusivity is often a key consideration when determining what category applies. Recently, the Court of Appeal for Ontario considered the degree of exclusivity required in a dependent contractor relationship in Keenan v. Canac Kitchens Ltd. In Keenan, the plaintiffs had…
The HRTO and the Duty to Accommodate: How Far Does an Employer Have to Go?
In a helpful decision for employers, Pourasadi v. Bentley Leathers, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) found that an employer’s duty to accommodate did not extend to altering the essential duties of a position. In this case, the Applicant, a retail store manager, requested a workplace accommodation for a wrist injury which prevented her…
Finding that Non-Worker Injury Reportable Under OHSA Overturned by Court of Appeal
Today, the Court of Appeal for Ontario rendered its long anticipated decision in Blue Mountain Resorts Limited v. Ontario (Labour). It overturned a finding of the Ontario Labour Relations Board, upheld on judicial review by the Divisional Court, that the drowning of a Blue Mountain hotel guest in the hotel’s swimming pool was reportable under…
OLRB Dismisses Related Employer Application Involving an Employer and its Sub-Contractor
A recent decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board may be of significance to employers who retain sub-contractors on a regular basis. The Board found that York Region and York BRT, an operation which contracted with York Region to provide it with transit services, were not related employers under subsection 1(4) of the Labour Relations…
Supreme Court of Canada Renders Decision on Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Workplace Computer
The Supreme Court of Canada rendered R. v. Cole in which it unanimously held that employees have a diminished but reasonable expectation of privacy in the use of their workplace computers. This case involved a warrantless police search of the accused’s workplace computer, which contained materials alleged to be child pornography. That evidence was excluded…