In Manastersky v. Royal Bank of Canada, a majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed its earlier finding that a trial judge had erred when he found a former executive was presumptively entitled to incentive compensation during the reasonable notice period. Background Facts During his employment with RBC Dominion Securities Inc. (RBCDS), Mr. Manastersky…
Tag: Termination of Employment
Court Rules that Calculation of Severance Under ESA is not Limited to Ontario Payroll
In Hawkes v Max Aicher, the Divisional Court set aside an Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) decision and found that the calculation of payroll for the purposes of determining an employee’s severance entitlement under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) should be based on the combined payroll of the Ontario employer and its global parent…
Appellate Court Considers Contractual Rights Upon Termination in Light of Ocean Nutrition and Affirms Original Decision
In Mikelsteins v. Morrison Hershfield Limited, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed its earlier finding that an employee’s common law entitlements upon termination of employment are distinct from any rights the employee may have under a shareholder agreement where they have purchased the shares separate and apart from their compensation structure. Background In June…
Ontario Government Announces Extension of Temporary Relief from ESA Termination and Severance Provisions
On Thursday, September 3, 2020, the Ontario government announced that it would be extending the temporary relief measures from the termination and severance provisions of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) until January 2, 2021. The temporary measures are found in Ontario Regulation 228/20, Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (IDEL Regulation), and had been set to expire today (September 4, 2020). The IDEL Regulation has been amended to define the “COVID-19 period” as that period beginning on March 1, 2020 and ending on January 2, 2021
OMHRA Fall ECHO Newsletter Features Two Articles by Jessica Toldo
The Fall 2018 issue of OMHRA’s ECHO newsletter features two articles co-authored by Hicks Morley lawyer Jessica Toldo.
In the article “Considerations for Municipal Employers When Drafting Termination Clauses in Employment Contracts,” Jessica discusses the importance of municipal employers having a clear and well-crafted termination provision to minimize the risk that a reviewing court will find the clause to be unenforceable, should litigation arise and highlight five key considerations when drafting termination clauses in light of some important developments in the case law.
The second article authored by Jessica, “HRTO Determines Requiring Proof of Eligibility to Work in Canada on a Permanent Basis is Discriminatory,” reviews a recent case where the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario found that a pre-employment ‘permanence requirement’ was discriminatory on the basis of the applicant’s citizenship.
Benefits Canada Publishes an Article by Thomas Agnew on Liability in Mass Terminations
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.
Benefits Canada Publishes an Article by Thomas Agnew on Termination in Employment Contracts
Hicks Morley’s Thomas Agnew authored an article in Benefits Canada titled “Employers Given Mixed Messages on Termination in Employment Contracts.” Employment contracts often contain clauses limiting an employee’s entitlement upon termination to the minimum entitlements under the Employment Standards Act or any other amount the employer and employee have agreed to. However, if the clauses violate the act in any way, courts may not enforce them.
Shivani Chopra Quoted in Canadian HR Reporter on Supreme Court Confirms Employers can Terminate Workers With Disabilities
Canadian HR Reporter quoted Hicks Morley’s Shivani Chopra in an August 7, 2017 article titled “Supreme Court confirms employers can terminate workers with disabilities.”
OMHRA ECHO Newsletter Features Articles by Stephanie Jeronimo and Julia Nanos
The Spring 2017 issue of OMHRA’s ECHO newsletter features two articles by Hicks Morley lawyers. Stephanie Jeronimo and Julia Nanos authored articles titled “Let’s Talk About Employment Contracts!” and…
Supreme Court of Canada Majority Rules “Unjust Dismissal” Provisions of Canada Labour Code Prohibit Without Cause Dismissals of Non-Unionized Employees
In an important decision for federally regulated employers, Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada has found the “unjust dismissal” provisions of Part III of the Canada Labour Code (Code) prohibit “without cause” dismissal of non-managerial, non-unionized employees with at least 12 months consecutive service, thereby allowing those employees to access the remedial relief (reasons, reinstatement, equitable relief) available under the Code.