First Reference company logo

First Reference Talks

News and Discussions on Payroll, HR & Employment Law

decorative image

wrongful dismissal

Clock on limitation period for wrongful dismissal claim starts on day of notice – not last day worked

A recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice confirms that the limitation period in respect of a wrongful dismissal claim commences on the day that the employee is provided notice of the termination, not on the last day the employee works.

 

, , , , , , ,

Sloan v. Just Energy Corporation: Pregnancy and fairness under the Code

The Code protects employees from discrimination based on various protected grounds. One of the more difficult of these may be pregnancy, as often the question becomes not whether or not the applicant was pregnant, but rather when the employer became aware of the pregnancy, and whether or not the pregnancy was a factor in the employee’s termination.

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

A primer on undue hardship and frustration of contract

This blog post provides a primer on the state of undue harship and frustration of contract under Ontario’s Human Rights Code.

 

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Must you include bonuses when calculating lost wages?

In the case, Bain v. UBS, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice tackled the issue of whether bonuses are too be included when calculating the income that an individual would have earned during a period of reasonable notice.

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

Fishing for notice: British Columbia Supreme Court addresses inducement and contingency factors in wrongful dismissal suits

Care is required when recruiting a potential employee, but not all active recruitment activities qualify as inducement. More than giving the employee the impression there is room to grow or job security is required. Actual evidence of promises made by the company and the employee’s reliance upon those promises is necessary to sustain a determination of inducement. Nevertheless, employers can avoid claims of inducement by using written employment agreements that contain “entire agreement” clauses and confirm that the employee has not been induced by any promises.

 

, , , , , , ,

OHSA in wonderland: Through the looking glass

If an employee alleges a violation of section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”) then the employer must prove there has been no violation. This is called a reverse onus clause which means an employer must prove it did not violate OHSA. After a brief summary of the remedies that are available to employees under section 50 of OHSA, this blog discusses three recent cases.

 

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

Three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk

The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: Ontario Employment Standards Act reforms underway; employees awarded $15,000 each in moral damages against employer; and upcoming employment and labour law changes in Alberta.

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

Three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk

The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: Changing Workplaces Review final report; employee wrongfully dismissed awarded $46,000 in damages; and employer successful in challenging worker’s entitlement to cost relief.

 

, , , , ,

Important decision regarding mitigation of damages following termination

The Ontario Court of Appeal, in Brake v. PJ-M2R Restaurant Inc., recently clarified the law of mitigation.

 

, , , , , , ,

The end of accommodation? Frustration of the employment contract as a last resort

One of the goals of legislation such as the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the Human Rights Code is to promote accessibility and accommodation in various forums, including the workplace. However, when it becomes clear that, despite accommodating an employee to the point of undue hardship, a disabled employee will never again be able to return to his or her job or be accommodated in another position, what can an employer do?

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

Three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk

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.

 

, , , , , ,

Wrongful dismissal: When does the limitation period clock start running?

A recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice touches upon a little discussed area of employment law. Specifically, when does the limitation period clock start running for a claim of wrongful dismissal?

 

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

Three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk

The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: An employee who was dismissed for not submitting a doctor’s note in a timely fashion; a firefighter who was reinstated after being dismissed for sexually harassing a co–worker; and human rights claims, made by a former employee, that were barred by terms of a final release received on termination.

 

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Fast food firing leads to aggravated damages

A recent BC Supreme Court decision finding a fast food employee was wrongfully dismissed and entitled to aggravated damages has been making newspaper headlines across the country. Ms. Ram had worked as a cook in various Burger King locations for 24 years, and was terminated for just cause after taking home a fish sandwich, fries and a drink at the end of her shift without paying for them. Ms. Ram’s claim was heard over a seven day trial, resulting in a lengthy decision.

 

, , , , , ,

Business and booze: Dealing with alcohol in the workplace

The relationship between employee alcohol use and work is complex. In Ontario, there are specific legal obligations which apply, and employers must exercise caution. Without a proper understanding of their legal obligations, employers face a minefield which may unwittingly result in unwanted liability.

 

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

Previous Posts