First Reference company logo

First Reference Talks

News and Discussions on Payroll, HR & Employment Law

decorative image

long service employees

Employee’s age justifies wrongful dismissal damages of 24 months

Given the elimination of mandatory retirement years ago, employees are working for longer periods of time and well into their 60s and some into their 70s. Age has always been one of the key Bardal factors, in addition to title, length of service and compensation, that courts use to determine an appropriate common law notice period. In the recent case of Ozorio v. Canadian Hearing Society, 2016 ONSC 5440, Justice O’Marra confirmed that an employee’s age remains a significant factor in determining a common law notice period.

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

“Age is an impediment”: Fair severance for older employees in Ontario

Courts have previously recognized that older employees may struggle to find comparable re-employment. In a recent decision, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded 24 months’ common law reasonable notice to a dismissed employee who was 61 years old at the time of dismissal. This decision provides some helpful direction and guidance for employers that move to terminate the employment of older, long service employees from their organization.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A brave new world? – Probably not but employers sometimes have to deal with 26 months’ notice and “dependant contractors”

The Ontario Court of Appeal has further shattered the “24 month maximum” myth. In Keenan v. Canac Kitchens Ltd., the Court of Appeal upheld a Trial Judge’s finding that two long service workers were “dependent contractors” and therefore entitled to 26 months’ reasonable notice on termination.

 

, , , , , , , , ,