In This Issue: 5 Key Things for Employers to Consider in Drafting Termination Clauses in Employment Contracts, What Is – and What Isn’t – Constructive Dismissal: An Update, FTRQ&A with John Kloosterman: Key Differences Between Canadian and U.S. Employment Law and much more!
The July 24, 2018 issue of Labour Notes® newsletter features an article authored by Hicks Morley lawyer Ryan Plener. In the article “Appeal Court Rules on Termination Clauses and Proper ‘Failsafe’ Language,” Ryan discusses how a recent decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal, where it reversed the lower court decision, could serve as an example to clarify the different interpretations of the employment contract provisions which limit entitlements upon termination.
Canadian Lawyer Magazine quoted Hicks Morley’s Julia Nanos in a July 3, 2018 article titled “Retailers squeezed by new rules.” The article discusses how some of the new laws implemented in Ontario, such as calculations for holiday pay and equal pay for equal work are affecting restaurants and retailers.
It has now been 7 months since Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017, was enacted and cases are beginning to emerge which interpret the new provisions of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA). In this Minimum Standards Monitor, we review some decisions of particular interest to employers which involve the new personal emergency leave (PEL) requirements, the equal pay for equal work provisions and the new minimum wage entitlements.
The differing interpretations by the courts of employment contract provisions which limit entitlements upon termination has caused considerable confusion of late. The Ontario Court of Appeal has rendered a helpful decision which may serve to lessen some of the confusion. The Court reversed a lower court decision and found that a clause in an employment…
The introduction of two paid personal emergency leave (PEL) days to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) has revived the debate about whether collective agreements or policies provide a Greater Right or Benefit (GROB), or alternatively, whether entitlements under the collective agreement or policies can be offset against the PEL entitlement. The first arbitration case since the paid entitlements were introduced (from Arbitrator Mitchnick) has brought an interesting twist to the debate.
Hicks Morley’s Thomas Agnew authored an article in Benefits Canada titled “Court Decision Warns Employers About Financial Liability in Mass Terminations.” Employers should proceed carefully when it comes to mass terminations. A recent court decision in Ontario found the employer’s failure to comply with the Employment Standards Act’s technical posting requirement for mass terminations meant that the notice of termination given prior to the date of the posting was void, exposing the company to potentially significant liability for that period.
Late on May 7, 2018, the Ontario government announced that it is reinstating the prior public holiday pay formula that pre-dated Bill 148. Ontario Regulation 375/18 was filed on the same day and the reinstatement of the prior formula comes into force on July 1, 2018. The regulation will remain in force until December 31, 2019…
The Law Times quoted Hicks Morley’s Ryan Plener in an April 16, 2018 article titled “Class actions on worker misclassification will continue.” The article explores how worker misclassification class actions are on the rise, according to the growing band of employment lawyers handling cases for plaintiffs. Citing a recent decision in the matter of Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc. where the Ontario Superior Court Justice stayed the action in favour of arbitration under a clause in the service agreement signed by all Uber drivers…
In King v DST Systems, the Ontario Superior Court again struck down an Employment Standard Act, 2000 (ESA)-only termination clause – this time for not mentioning benefits.