The Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court just quashed the grievance settlement board’s decision that a probationary employee’s termination was arbitrary and discriminatory and granted the application for judicial review. The evidence was clear that the employer’s decision to terminate the probationary employee was neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. In fact, the decision to terminate came after numerous reviews of the employee’s work and conversations about performance concerns.
Balancing one-year contracts with pregnancy leave – Outcome of Human Rights Board of Inquiry hearing
On June 13, 2013, a Nova Scotia Human Rights Board of Inquiry rendered its decision on the pregnancy related case I discussed last month. Essentially, the case was about a difference of opinion and a clash of wills between two strong-minded individuals. The fact that the employee was pregnant at the time was simply ruled to be a “temporal coincidence”.
Does an employee have the common law right to procedural fairness in the manner of their termination
It is assumed by most H.R. professionals that employees are entitled to procedural fairness and, in particular, to be advised as to the reasons for dismissal from employment. In fact, there is no such right in private companies. Employees in private companies (i.e. non-governmental entities) have no common law right of procedural fairness in the manner of their termination, whether the termination is for cause or not. Similarly, employees have no legal right to an opportunity to respond to the alleged reasons for dismissal.
The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench recently challenged the Human Rights Commission’s decision to dismiss an employee’s discrimination complaint based on age as without merit. The employer denies discriminating against the employee on the basis of his age, and maintains that the employee was terminated for poor performance.