Employee’s tweets about confidential settlement payments cost him $50,000.00

Employee’s tweets about confidential settlement payments cost him $50,000.00

The majority of employment disputes are resolved long before they ever reach a court room. Usually, the former employee will agree to accept a sum of money from their previous employer in exchange for executing a release agreement. While the substance of release agreements can vary, they generally share two similarities:

  1. No further liability: The individual agrees that upon receipt of an agreed payment, he/she shall have no further right to seek additional compensation as a result of their employment, or the termination thereof; and

  2. Confidentiality: The individual agrees to keep the terms of settlement confidential.

Top Five Things to Consider When Dismissing an Employee

Top Five Things to Consider When Dismissing an Employee

The decision to terminate an individual’s employment is not an easy one. At times, however, whether due to economic pressures, or poor performance, it may nevertheless be necessary.

The process your organization follows when carrying out a termination of employment is important. It can have a big impact on the affected individual and, if done carefully, can reduce the potential risk of liability to your organization.

Employee’s Attempt to Solicit Clients from Former Employer Proves Costly

Employee’s Attempt to Solicit Clients from Former Employer Proves Costly

Restrictive covenants (such as non-competition and non-solicitation clauses) are a common feature of many employment agreements. It is relatively rare, however, that companies resort to litigation to enforce these requirements by way of an injunction. This may be down to the costs associated with doing so, or that the required legal threshold to obtain an injunction is high.

Tips on the right way to hire employees in Ontario

Tips on the right way to hire employees in Ontario

Hiring a new worker can be exciting. Presumably, by the time you make the job offer, something about the candidate has impressed you and suggested this person is the one for the job. Similarly, most hires are eager for the opportunity to work with you – that’s why they applied for and accepted the job!

The Advocates' Quarterly Publishes Article by Paul Willetts

The Advocates' Quarterly Publishes Article by Paul Willetts

Last month, The Advocates' Quarterly published an article by Paul Willetts entitled "Tagg Industries v. Rieder: Is Storing Pornography on a Work-Issued Laptop Cause for Dismissal". The article looks at some of the lessons for employers coming from this case when asserting cause for dismissal. In particular, employers should ensure that: the misconduct relied upon for cause dismissal reflects an irreparable breach of trust; they can prove their assertion of cause (i.e. lead concrete evidence); the reasons for cause are communicated to the employee in a clear and contemporaneous fashion.

Arbitrator reinstates locomotive engineer fired for drinking whiskey on the job

Arbitrator reinstates locomotive engineer fired for drinking whiskey on the job

Generally speaking, employers have the right to dismiss employees that fail to report to work sober, and perform their duties in a safe manner, particularly where these requirements have been clearly communicated through written policy.

Medical Cannabis and Safety-Sensitive Jobs: Where can Employers Draw the Line?

Medical Cannabis and Safety-Sensitive Jobs: Where can Employers Draw the Line?

Much legal ink has been spilled over the past year about the impact of cannabis legalization on the workplace (see our overview here). At the end of the day, however, the basic rules of the game have not changed. Employees still cannot expect to attend at work while intoxicated. Employers can still insist on sobriety in the workplace. And safety-concerns regarding how to structure operations remain a foremost consideration in any workplace (and in fact are mandated by operation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act).

Ontario superior court confirms that frustration of contract is a two-way street

Ontario superior court confirms that frustration of contract is a two-way street

The legal doctrine of frustration of contract is well known to employment lawyers but its application is not all that intuitive to the average employer or employee. In the recent case of Hoekstra v. Rehability Occupational Therapy Inc., 2019 ONSC 562, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice was asked to revisit this doctrine and opine as to whether an employee, as compared to an employer, can ever assert frustration to end an employment relationship.