Last month, the provincial government passed into law Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017. This Act brings with it significant changes to employment law in Ontario for both employees and employers. In particular, Bill 148 will overhaul parts of the Employment Standards Act, the Labour Relations Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Q&A is a recurring series on the Vey Willetts LLP blog. The aim is to provide quick answers to questions we commonly encounter in our day-to-day practice of employment law. In this edition, we focus on constructive dismissal from employment.

Vey Willetts LLP was recently successful in defeating a summary judgment brought by IBM Canada Limited. This decision, Amberber v. IBM Canada Limited, serves as an important reminder to employers of the need to draft contractual termination clauses with a high degree of clarity, or risk unanticipated liability in the event of a without cause dismissal.

A recent decision from Ontario's Court of Appeal, North v. Metaswitch Networks Corporation, confirms how the courts in our province will assess an employee's severance entitlement where his/her employment was governed by a written agreement that includes a termination provision.

A dismissal from employment is rarely pleasant for anyone involved. Frustration, anxiety and hurt feelings are all common by-products. But how do we assess whether an employee has suffered harm beyond the ordinary due to a poorly handled termination?

Vey Willetts lawyer Paul Willetts was quoted in the October 10, 2017 edition of The Lawyer's Daily. The article, "Timing, Privacy Issues Raised over Ontario's Proposed Domestic Violence Leave Bill," considers recent proposed legislation that seeks to provide employees with up to 10 days of paid leave, and up to 15 weeks of unpaid leave per year to deal with issues arising from episodes of domestic or sexual violence.

Q&A is a recurring series on the Vey Willetts LLP blog. The aim is to provide quick answers to questions we commonly encounter in our day-to-day practice of employment law. In this edition, we focus on how to navigate the loss of a job and ensure that you receive a fair severance package.

In a recent decision from Windsor, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ordered an employer to pay almost $60,000 in damages for the way in which a female employee was repeatedly harassed, insulted and humiliated by senior management.

Vey Willetts lawyer Paul Willetts was quoted in the August 21, 2017 edition of the Ottawa Metro News. The article, "Be Warned, Job Seekers: There is Such a Thing as a Bad Reference", considers a recent Ontario court case in which the owner of a company provided a negative reference to a prospective employer for an employee that it had recently fired. The prospective employer relied on the negative reference and decided not to offer a job to the individual. Consequently, the individual sued for wrongful dismissal and defamation.

All Ontario employers have a duty to protect employees from workplace harassment. These protections are set out in the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”).

Vey Willetts LLP is pleased to announce the launch of the first Severance Pay Calculator tailored specifically for the needs of employees and businesses in Ottawa and Eastern Ontario. 

A common question employment lawyers are asked (by both employees and employers) is whether it is legal to make secret recordings while at work. A variety of circumstances may provide the motive for such action. An employee concerned they are being bullied may want to record proof of harassing comments made to them. Likewise, a supervisor may wish to secretly record the contents of a disciplinary meeting to safeguard themselves against future allegations of what was said.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Brake v RJ-M2R Restaurant Inc. This is an important decision for employees and employers alike as it may potentially change the way in which Ontario courts assess a wrongfully dismissed employee’s mitigation efforts and their consequent entitlement to additional severance. Mitigation refers to the obligation of dismissed employees to look for alternate comparable employment. Feldman J.A.’s concurring reasons, in particular, suggest that where a dismissed employee accepts an inferior job, any earnings therein may not count as ‘mitigation income’.

Section 54 of the Ontario Employment Standards Act requires that employers in the province must provide either notice or pay in lieu of notice, up to a maximum of 8 weeks, if they dismiss an employee (except in cases of serious employee misconduct). 

Vey Willetts lawyer Andrew Vey recently authored an article in the May 2017 edition of HR Update entitled, "Just Accommodate Me: Legal Obligations in the Accommodation Process." The article considers the roles that the employer, the employee and the union (where present) are required to play in ensuring that reasonable accommodation in the workplace is provided.

Beyond providing fair severance, one of the best things an employer can do to help a dismissed employee is to offer assistance in finding a new job. This assistance could include outplacement support, speaking with industry contacts and/or offering to provide references to prospective employers, if required. 

The Lawyer’s Daily quoted Vey Willetts' Paul Willetts in a May 26, 2017 article titled “Changing Workplaces Review may spur sweeping labour law changes in Ontario.” The article explores the recommendations set out in the Changing Workplaces Review Final Report and how these changes, if implemented, may affect Ontario employees and employers.