A five-member panel of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has overturned a lower court decision which had found in part that restrictions on the right to strike in The Public Service Essential Services Act infringed the freedom of association guarantee in section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court of Appeal…
Publication Name: Case In Point
Federal Appeals Officer Confirms Work Refusal Must Be Based on More Than “Hypothesis or Conjecture”
The Occupational Health and Safety Tribunal Canada has found that there was insufficient evidence of radiation contamination on parcels arriving from Japan after the Fukushima nuclear incident in 2011 to warrant a work refusal at a mail sorting facility. For a reasonable expectation of danger to exist, there must be more than hypothesis or conjecture….
Termination of Employee Following Work Refusal Results in Finding of Reprisal
The Ontario Labour Relations Board has found an employer violated the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”) when it immediately terminated an employee instead of taking any steps whatsoever to investigate a work refusal. The employee was a probationary truck driver who had worked with the employer for three months. He felt that the truck…
Supreme Court of Canada Denies Leave to Appeal in Carrigan
Today, the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal from the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Carrigan v. Carrigan. The Court of Appeal’s decision awarded the payment of the pre-retirement death benefit payable under an Ontario registered pension plan to a member’s designated beneficiaries rather than to his common law spouse (Ms Quinn),…
HRTO Renders Significant Remedies Decision
In the recent decision of Fair v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, a non-union employee was reinstated to employment with back pay, despite having been away from the workplace for nearly a decade. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario explicitly rejected the employer’s argument that it would be unfair to order reinstatement in light of the…
SCC to Render Leave to Appeal Decision in Carrigan
On March 28, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada will render its leave to appeal decision in Quinn v. Carrigan. The majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal awarded the payment of the pre-retirement death benefit payable under an Ontario registered pension plan to a member’s designated beneficiaries rather than to his common law spouse…
Divisional Court Confirms that Section 80(3) of the PBA Deems Employment to Continue Following Sale of Business
In Ontario Pension Board v. Ratansi, the Ontario Divisional Court confirmed that the Pension Benefits Act (“PBA”) deems that following a sale of business transaction, both employment and pension plan membership continue under the predecessor employer’s pension plan while the employee continues in employment with the successor employer. The decision overturns an earlier decision of…
Employer’s Use of Video Surveillance in Fire Station Reasonable When Addressing a Serious Safety Concern
Arbitrator Sheehan has affirmed that an employer may install and operate video surveillance in a workplace where it has legitimate and serious concerns about safety issues. In this arbitration, a firefighters’ Association grieved the installation of cameras at two fire stations. It argued, among other things, that the requirement that the employees be subject to…
Sale of Assets and Hiring of Former Employees of Defunct Business not Sale of Business within LRA: OLRB
In a recent case, the Ontario Labour Relations Board (“OLRB”) helped clarify what situations will trigger the operation of the sale of business provisions of the Labour Relations Act (“Act”) particularly when a business purchases the assets and premises of an organization which is unionized. This case may provide guidance for an organization which is…
University’s Removal of Controversial Posters Not Discriminatory under Human Rights Code
In its recent decision SAIA v. Carleton University, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“Tribunal”) found that the decision by Carleton University to remove certain posters from its campus was not discriminatory, nor was it driven by discriminatory animus against Palestinian students. The University had a policy that posters must be approved by the appropriate…