Uber Driver Class Action Stayed Due to Arbitration Clause

A recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court provides an important update and clarification on the applicability of arbitration clauses in a case where employment status is challenged. In Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., the Court stayed a class action filed by a plaintiff on behalf of his fellow class members, Uber Drivers, against Uber…

Ontario Court of Appeal Rules (Again) on the Enforceability of an ESA-Only Termination Clause

The Ontario Court of Appeal has once again considered a minimum entitlements clause in an employment contract and ruled it to be generally enforceable. In Nemeth v Hatch Ltd., an employee with 19 years service was dismissed with 8 weeks’ notice of termination and 19.42 weeks’ salary as severance pay, as well as continued benefits…

Planning to Give Notice of Mass Termination under the ESA? What Employers Should Know

In a decision rendered on September 26, 2017, an Ontario court held that an employer violated the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) when it failed to file a Form 1 with the Ministry of Labour (MOL) on the same date that that the employer provided approximately 12 months’ working notice of termination to 77 employees. As a result, the employer was not given any credit for the working notice period that preceded the date it filed the Form 1 with the MOL – a period of over one year. Rather, common law damages will be assessed on the basis of a much smaller working notice period of less than 8 weeks. This decision signals that the failure to file a Form 1 contemporaneously with the giving of notice of mass termination may have costly implications for employers.

Supporting Regulations to Bill 148 Now Available

On December 18, 2017, the Ontario government filed the following regulations in support of amendments made by Bill 148, Fair Workplaces, Betters Jobs Act, 2017, to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) and the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (LRA): Regulations Made Under the ESA: 1.   O. Reg. 526/17 amends O. Reg. 285/01 (Exemptions, Special Rules and…

Deadline for Submissions on Exemptions under ESA Extended

As we previously reported, the Ontario government is seeking input on the following occupations currently exempted under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA): Architects Domestic Workers, Homemakers and Residential Care Workers IT Professionals Managerial and Supervisory Employees Pharmacists Residential Building Superintendents, Janitors and Caretakers The exclusion of domestic workers under the Labour Relations Act, 1995…

Court of Appeal Considers Continuity of Employment Where Employer Purchased Some Assets of Former Employer

In Krishnamoorthy v. Olympus Canada Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal recently considered the issue of continuity of an employee’s employment following the sale of a business, and in particular, where the sale of business involves the acquisition of only some of the vendor company’s assets. The plaintiff, Krishnamoorthy, became employed with Carsen Group in…

More Changes to Bill 148 after Second Committee Review

On November 16, 2017, the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs (the Committee) adopted significant amendments to Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017 (Bill 148). These amendments are in addition to amendments the Committee made in August of this year after First Reading of Bill 148, and are expected to be adopted by the Legislature in the near future.

Setting up Shop in Canada? What U.S. Employers Need to Know About Canadian Employment Law

While Canada and the United States are alike in many respects, there are a few key differences in employment law that U.S. employers should be aware of if you are considering buying, selling or operating a business in Canada.

Ontario Court Affirms Plaintiff’s Evidentiary Burden Under The Class Proceedings Act, 1992

In Bartholomew v. Coco Paving Inc. et al, the Ontario Superior Court recently rendered a helpful decision in dismissing a motion for certification of a proposed class action. The Court re-affirmed the evidentiary burden which must be met by a plaintiff in satisfying the four tests under sections 5(1)(b) through 5(1)(e) of the Class Proceedings…