Author Archive - Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Given the majority of legal disputes that settle before going to trial, the role of a modern civil litigator has shifted from not only being a courtroom specialist, but also being an expert in negotiation. The main goal in almost all negotiations for an employee is to extract a large payout, while the goal for the employer is to settle the claim while paying out as little as possible. Though lawyers use different techniques for extracting these results for their clients, I wanted to share three simple tips that are often overlooked when employers are negotiating a settlement.
As of the writing of this blog, Bill 26 has passed second reading and is before the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly for consultation and, so it remains to be seen if the above changes will come into force. That said, with the recent legislative attention on protecting employees with respect to sexual harassment and violence, it is likely that employers may soon need to revisit their policies and programs to account for domestic and sexual violence.
In the last few months, there has been an influx of commentary on the enforceability of contractual provisions purporting to limit an employee’s bonus entitlements upon termination. Following the Ontario Court of Appeal’s seminal decisions in Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. and Lin v. Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, much of this commentary has focused on the language needed to oust an employee’s implied right to their complete compensation package during the reasonable notice period. This focus on semantics has overshadowed one other consideration that remains instrumental to the enforceability of bonus provisions—the need to sufficiently communicate to employees the preconditions of bonus eligibility.
Cessation of an employee’s employment can happen by way of termination of employment by the employer or resignation by the employee. In the case of a voluntary resignation, while the employer may feel as though it is losing a beneficial employee, the upside is that the employer is not liable for the dreadful “reasonable notice of termination”. This blog discusses some of the best practices for employers when handling a resignation.
A recent Globe and Mail article highlights the fears that new parents face as they contemplate returning to work after a parental leave. It also highlights the issues employers must address when those employees return to work. Since our employer clients often raise questions about post–leave matters, we would like to offer some helpful tips on this issue.
Discriminatory grounds such as family status, age, marital status, etc. that deal with the duty to accommodate
The Ontario Human Rights Code lists a number of personal characteristics protected from discrimination: race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability. These personal characteristics are often referred to as “protected grounds”. An employer is prohibited from discriminating against an employee on the basis of any protected ground.
All employment relationships in Ontario are deemed to be contractual, whether or not a written contract is in place between the parties. When there is no written contract, the common law (judge-made law) imports a number of obligations into the contract that will bind the employer and the employee.
Mastering the ins and outs of the duty to accommodate under human rights legislation is hard. In fact, some would go so far as to say impossible. It’s no wonder this topic has floated to the top of the list of challenges faced by HR practitioners. I’ve given this some thought and come up with a number of rules that I feel should be followed in all cases.
On December 3, 2015, the Ontario Legislature passed the Police Record Checks Reform Act. The Act will come into force upon proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, which date has yet to be announced though it is expected to occur in the next few weeks. The Act would bring about a sea change in the manner in which criminal record checks are conducted.