The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: whether an amount paid to a taxpayer on retirement qualifies as a retiring allowance; whether criminal charges alone for off-duty conduct is enough for just cause dismissal; when moral damages are to be awarded in a wrongful dismissal case.
The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: The Federal government`s introduction of legislation for a stronger Canada Pension Plan and a more secure retirement for Canadians; a case where the Ontario Labour Relations Board had to decide whether a worker was an employee, and not an independent contractor, as under the Employment Standards Act, 2000; employer compensation budgets for 2017.
On June 20, 2016, the federal government Finance Minister reached an agreement in principle with most of the provincial and territorial Finance Ministers to strengthen the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) for future generations of Canadians.
The number of workers over the age of 65 has significantly increased in recent years, and a survey by Towers Watson found that one-third of all respondents and 42 percent of older workers have decided to delay retirement. This aging workforce demographic means that not only are there more older workers remaining in their employment, but also that there are many older workers seeking new employment.
Like Clint Eastwood’s character in Unforgiven, you may say to them,“Deserve’s got nothing’ to do with it”, as a parting remark. But can you fathom the mental state of ‘exiting’ employees, when they’re moving out of their cabins, handing over the keys, returning office equipments, putting their desk’s contents in a cardboard box, amidst uttering grateful and humble so longs?
The three most viewed articles on HRinfodesk this week deal with breach of confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements; how an employer was held liable despite the employee having suffered no discrimination; and how individuals can now delay receiving their Old Age Security pension plan.
As anticipated, since the federal Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act came into force December 14, 2012, several provinces have followed suit and tabled legislation to implement the new kind of portable deferred income plan, which is designed to provide retirement income to workers and self-employed persons who do not have access to an employer-sponsored retirement pension plan.
With recent changes to Canada’s old age security pension, Canadians and retirement have been in the spotlight. According to Scotiabank’s annual investment poll, over 30 percent of Canadians plan to retire later, up from 27 percent in 2011. It’s not news that Canadians are retiring later than they did a decade ago, but why?
Pension funding rule changes announced on February 13, 2013, will protect jobs and preserve benefits for thousands of private-sector workers, according to the Government of Nova Scotia.
We are repeating this December 21 blog post to ensure employers, human resources professionals, payroll specialists, legal advisors, managers and supervisors among others start 2013 on the right foot.
A recent decision by the Federal Court of Appeal has upheld the mandatory retirement practice for Air Canada pilots. This decision overturns earlier findings by the Federal Court of Canada and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that contractual provisions forcing Air Canada pilots to retire at 60 violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.
On June 29, 2012, legislation for Pooled Registered Pension Plans (PRPPs) has been given Royal Assent.
When mandatory retirement was eliminated, I noted that this change might create some interesting HR issues for employers of older workers. In the past, employers were often in a position to tolerate declining performance, comfortable in the knowledge that the employment relationship had a fixed “end date.” As a result, they could allow the employee to work out their last few years and retire with dignity.
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.