Making a complaint of workplace sexual harassment can be daunting. If the actual harassment itself is not bad enough, employees often fear job-based retaliation for speaking out, or that making matters public might undermine their professional reputation.

A long-standing rule of wrongful dismissal cases is that employees who seek additional severance are required to look for new work post-dismissal. Employers are only obligated to pay monies for actual loss incurred beyond any statutory entitlement period.

Most people understand that if they lose their job, they have a right to receive severance from their employer. Generally speaking, what reflects fair severance for a person will depend on a number of factors such as whether the individual has a written employment contract, their age, their tenure of service, their formal education and the availability of comparable jobs in the local market.

The pending legalization of recreational marijuana is a source of frequent debate and significant public interest. It has also raised concerns for employers as to how legalization may impact their workplaces and what steps may be taken to protect staff, ensure safety and avoid loss of productivity.

The provincial election campaign is in full swing. Attack ads are on TV, the debates have taken place and politicians of every stripe are pounding the pavement and knocking on doors to boost their hopes of election.

As we approach June 7, many of us who work may wonder whether we will get time off to head to the polls, and if so, how much and will such leave be paid? The Ontario Election Act provides eligible employees with three consecutive hours during voting hours (which are 9:00am to 9:00pm Eastern Standard Time) to go and vote.

A non-solicitation clause is a contractual requirement that serves to protect an employer from a departing employee’s attempts to recruit its staff or solicit business from its customers, clients or suppliers. At their root, these clauses are designed to protect the legitimate business interests of a company or organization, and to avoid unexpected loss in the event that staff depart.

Harassment in the workplace continues to be the human resources story that dominates the news. While cases like that of Harvey Weinstein and Charlie Rose often take centre stage, there are plenty of examples here in Canada.

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 temporary lay-offs from work.

On a recent Ontario summary judgment motion, Justice Kane considered whether a former employee of Algonquin College (the “College”) had been properly dismissed for just cause.

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 wrongful dismissal from employment.

Dismissing an employee is not a pleasant experience. But whether you like it or not, this is one task that most businesses will encounter at some point. As President Trump reminded us again this week after reports surfaced that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson learned of his firing by way of a twitter post, there is both a right way and a wrong way to conduct employee terminations.

Employees are entitled to work in a respectful environment, free from harassment and discrimination. In circumstances where the work environment deteriorates to such an extent that it may be considered “poisonous” or “toxic”, a court will likely find that the employer’s behaviour in creating and/or condoning this environment amounted to a constructive dismissal of the affected employee.

Vey Willetts lawyer Paul Willetts was quoted in the February 26, 2018 edition of The Lawyer's Daily. The article, "Automated legal services cost efficient, but can leave clients vulnerable, lawyers say", considers the advantages and disadvantages of artificial intelligence, and the automation of legal documents, for individuals in need of legal assistance. 

Last month, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in Nemeth v. Hatch Ltd. garnering a lot of attention within the province’s employment law bar.

Since allegations related to Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein first became public, the #metoo movement has provided a catalyst for society to confront its handling of sexual harassment. Just this week, the latest public figure to be embroiled in such allegations is Steve Paikin, a prominent journalist employed by the provincially-funded broadcaster TVOntario (“TVO”).

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 sexual harassment in the workplace.

Last April, we wrote about an interesting decision from the Ontario Superior Court concerning when the limitations period begins to run for claims of wrongful dismissal and statutory severance pay. In that case, the Court held that the limitation period to claim unpaid statutory severance pay commences as soon as working notice of dismissal is issued to an employee.

Before 2017 comes to a close, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has provided at least one last case that is sure to catch the attention of employers. In a decision issued on December 7th, Justice Emery issued an award of $750,000 for moral and punitive damages to a senior managerial employee who effectively found herself benched for almost 10 months prior to her actual date of dismissal.