Sunday 22 December 2013

Ontario Employment Law’s Top Five Cases – 2013 Edition

Ontario employment lawyers had another interesting year with a number of provocative and interesting decisions coming from this country’s courts and administrative tribunals.

Continuing a tradition started last year on the law blog for the suddenly unemployed, (see Top Five Cases of Importance to Ontario Employment Lawyers 2012) it’s time again for me to name the top five cases of importance to Ontario employment law… at least according to me.

Saturday 21 December 2013

SCC: Pension Benefits Cannot be Deducted from Wrongful Dismissal Damages

Are defined benefit pension benefits deductible from wrongful dismissal damages? According to a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada, the answer is no, they are not.

In its decision in IBM Canada Limited v. Waterman, 2013 SCC 70 (CanLII) seven of this county’s nine Supreme Court Justices (LeBel, Fish, Abella, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ.) agreed that pension benefits are not properly deductible from wrongful dismissal damages. Justice Rothstein and Chief Justice McLachlin disagreed.

Sunday 8 December 2013

How Long Does an Employee Have to Sue for Unpaid Commission Payments?

How Long Does an Employee Have to Sue for Unpaid Commission Payments?

How long does an employee have to sue for unpaid commission payments in Ontario? Simple; two years. Two years from what date? That was the question that the Court of Appeal for Ontario was recently asked to resolve in the case of Ali v. O-Two Medical Technologies Inc., 2013 ONCA 733 (CanLII).

Saturday 7 December 2013

Has the Ontario Labour Relations Board Finally Given Some Protection to Harassed Employees?

Is an Ontario worker who makes a complaint of workplace harassment to his or her employer seeking the enforcement of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act or acting in compliance with that Act?

Can an employer legally fire someone who makes such a complaint without that termination being deemed an at of "reprisal" by the Ontario Labour Relations Board? Until the Ontario Labour Relation Board’s decision in Ljuboja v Aim Group Inc, 2013 CanLII 76529 (ON LRB) on November 22, 2013, the answers from this author would have been no, the employee is not seeking the enforcement of the Act, and yes, the employer can legally terminate the employee without the Labour Board deeming the termination as an act of reprisal. However, things may have changed.

Saturday 30 November 2013

The High Price of Free Employment Law Advice

A frequent question asked of this Ottawa employment lawyer is "how much does it cost to retain an employment lawyer?" While the true answer is "it depends," often an equally true answer is "a lot less than not retaining one."

Demonstrating that sometimes the adage 'you get what you pay for' is true is the story in the Toronto Star of two employees suing the Ontario Ministry of Labour ('the Labour Board') after receiving some free employment information about their rights following termination.

Sunday 24 November 2013

Benefits for Sick Employees

There are few good reasons to find oneself suddenly unemployed. However, of all the reasons to find oneself suddenly unemployed, the worst must be because one is sick.

This post will look at how to replace (at least in part) the income stream lost when an employee must focus his or her efforts on, and devote his or her time to, getting better rather than working.

Tuesday 19 November 2013

Wrongful Dismissal Damages Carry Punitive Elements: ONCA

Ask most Ontario employment lawyers what the purpose behind reasonable notice is and the answer that you are likely to receive is that it is intended to afford a dismissed employee the opportunity to go from one job to another. Indeed, the calculation of reasonable notice, at least as I always understood it, is the period of time it should take an employee to find new work following dismissal.

So with those comments in mind, I was somewhat shocked when I read the Court of Appeal for Ontario writing that wrongful dismissal damages have a "punitive element" to them.

The question for readers of this blog is: did the Court of Appeal get it right?