The purpose of severance is to bridge the gap while a person is unemployed and looking for a new job. As we often tell clients, severance is not intended to provide a windfall. When a person is dismissed from a job, they have an obligation to make reasonable efforts to offset the losses stemming from their dismissal (referred to as the “duty to mitigate”). In the right circumstances, this may include accepting an alternate offer of employment with the same employer or pursuing a reasonable opportunity that has been brought to their attention.

In a short decision, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has recently clarified an important question regarding fixed-term employment contracts. Namely, whether a fixed-term itself can be considered a type of termination clause.

“Time theft” describes situations where an employee is paid for time they knowingly misrepresent as having been worked. Time theft may take many different forms. It could include longer-than-scheduled breaks, misrepresenting or altering records (such as timecards), or completing personal matters on paid company time. It received renewed attention during the pandemic as more employees worked remotely.

2024 got off to a bang in the world of employment law. In a recent trial level decision, an Ontario judge has found yet another termination clause illegal and unenforceable. In so doing, the court accepted an entirely novel argument for why termination provisions may be read as impermissibly contracting out of the mandatory requirements of the Employment Standards Act, 2000

Much of employment law centres on wrongful dismissal litigation. Wrongful dismissal arises when an employer has terminated the employment relationship and failed to provide sufficient advance notice or pay-in-lieu to the affected employee. Less well known is the corollary of wrongful dismissal: wrongful resignation. Just as employers are obligated to give notice prior to terminating the employment relationship, so too are workers.

Hiring processes can be competitive – particularly in a slow market where eligible candidates may outnumber available opportunities. While applicants may look to present their experience or qualifications in the most favourable light (whether on a CV or in the course of an interview), there is a significant difference between positive spin and blatant dishonesty.

Among the changes brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic was an increased normalization of virtual meetings.

I can count on one hand the number of Zoom or Teams meetings I attended before March 2020. In 2023, by contrast, virtual meetings are an almost everyday occurrence.

On November 14, 2023, the Ontario provincial government tabled

Bill 149

It is not uncommon for an individual to work a second job – or to take on a “side hustle” – to supplement their income. Most employers will tolerate such activities where they are non-competitive in nature, carried on outside of working hours, and do not interfere with the individual’s performance of their duties.

When parties to a workplace dispute agree on a settlement, one typical term required by employers relates to confidentiality. Such clauses mandate that the employee refrain from telling third parties details of the deal that has been reached (with normal exceptions made for immediate family and professional advisers).

Individuals in Ontario have a duty to mitigate their loss of employment when seeking damages for wrongful (or constructive) dismissal. In practical terms this means that while employees may be able to seek damages from their former employer (to put them in the position they would have been had they received adequate notice of termination), they must make reasonable efforts to replace their lost income by looking for, and accepting, other comparable work.  

As of February 1, 2024, Part III of the Canada Labour Code (“CLC”) will require federally-regulated employers (including those in the private sector and Crown corporations) to meet the following obligations when terminating employment:

We have continually cautioned readers about the use of fixed-term employment contracts. The reason is simple: should fixed-term contracts be ended early, there is a high probability that dismissed employees may be entitled to payment for the balance of the remaining term.

As August rolls by, many of us are heading to cottages, beaches, and other exotic places to enjoy some well-earned R&R in the sun. For most (not within the blessed leisure classes) this means requesting time away from work and using our paid vacation time.

Due to recent changes to the Canada Labour Code (the “Code”), federally regulated employers are now required to provide workers with written “employment statements”.

From time to time, it may make sense for employers to revise and renew their employment agreements for existing staff. Updating contracts needs to be handled carefully and, as such, this article offers tips and best practices for this process.  

We often come across fixed-term contracts in our legal practice. Employers have varying reasons for wanting to use such agreements. Perhaps funding for an employee is tied to third party grants, or an employer wants to temporarily replace an existing worker during their period of maternity leave. Whatever the justification, we generally advise employers to think twice before using fixed-term contracts.

It is common for employers to include language in their staff contracts to help safeguard business interests. This may take the form of obligations to protect confidential information and/or refrain from soliciting staff, suppliers and/or clients after the employment relationship ends.