A recent decision rendered by an Ontario Arbitrator raises questions about the hard line that seemed to have been taken by adjudicators as a result of An Act to amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act with respect to violence and harassment in the workplace and other matters (formerly Bill 168), which amended the Occupational Health & Safety Act in order to address workplace violence and harassment.
The three most popular HRinfodesk articles this week deal with 2013 EI rates, hypersensitivity to scent in the workplace and insurbordinate behaviour…
The three most viewed articles in this week HRinfodesk newsletter deals with salary projections for 2013, taxability of fitness memberships and discipline linked to terminations.
Every organization has disciplinary concerns at some point in time arising from an employee’s actions which are deemed unacceptable to the employer and which may require some form of discipline to be administered. Generally, employees respect the need for discipline and usually appreciate having a disciplinary process that is deemed to be fair and impartial.
In the “old” days, employees took whatever their employers gave them when it came to cellphones or personal digital assistants. However, the popularity of devices such as Apple and Android smartphones prompted a backlash from staff demanding to use their product of choice. Many employers, seeing a way to reduce costs, invited employees to “bring your own device”…
Manitoba’s Court of Queen’s Bench recently confirmed that a termination for cause was inappropriate, given that it was not proportional to the employee’s conduct. As a result, the employer had to pay 12 months’ severance as set out in the employment agreement regarding a termination without cause.
When an employer seeks to rely on a breach of policy in disciplining an employee, the employer must prove that it clearly communicated the policy to the employee in question and has enforced the policy consistently. The importance of such communication in enforcement of workplace policies was demonstrated in Lambe v. Irving Oil Ltd.
The Ontario Labour Relations Board has provided what some believe to be the most significant legal interpretation yet of workplace harassment and employer reprisal in the context of the recently enacted Bill 168 amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA). The case, Conforti v. Investia Financial Services Inc., 2011, was decided on September 23, 2011.
‘Tis the season of the FIFA Women’s World Cup. This time, it’s women who are going to be playing, beginning this Sunday June 26 and ending July 17, in Germany. It may not be as popular as the men’s World Cup, but it is a busy and important year for women’s football/soccer! Will the rate of employee absenteeism be as high as when the men’s World Cup took place? Maybe not; but still, what can employers do to manage a sudden outbreak of “World Cup flu” cases in their workplace?
Pursuant to my blog post of January 11, 2011 discussing the implications of firing by email when an employee files a complaint under human rights legislation, Is it okay to fire an employee by email? It may depend on what course of legal action your former employee pursues.
I recently read a case coming out of the Yukon where an employee accused his employer of discriminating against him based on the ground of mental disability, which was contrary to the Yukon Human Rights Act.