Resources: Employment
-
Human Rights Tribunal Confirms Employers Continue to Drive the Bus
December 2017
In Adair v. Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission (No. 2), 2017 BCHRT 147, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal revisited what accommodation looks like in the employment context. The key reminder for employers and counsel is that the proposed accommodation need not be perfect – when there is more than one reasonable option for accommodation, “the employer is entitled to choose among them”.
Read More +
Human Rights Tribunal Confirms Employers Continue to Drive the Bus -
The Zellstoff Trilogy- Privacy v. Technology
December 2017
In the age of technology and data collection, there is, or can be, a digital footprint and record of virtually all employee activity.
Read More +
The Zellstoff Trilogy- Privacy v. Technology -
Executive’s Self-Dealing Can Lead to Rescission of Employment Agreement
November 2017
The focus of this article is a case arising out of Ontario: UPM-Kymmene Corp. v. UPM-Kymmene Miramichi Inc., [2002] O.J. No. 2412 (S.C.J.), affirmed [2004] O.J. No. 636 (C.A.).
Read More +
Executive’s Self-Dealing Can Lead to Rescission of Employment Agreement -
Boilerplate Non-Competition Clauses Are No Protection At All
November 2017
The B.C. Court of Appeal recently clarified the analytical framework regarding the enforceability of non-competition clauses in the employment context. In IRIS The Visual Group Western Canada Inc. v. Park, 2017 BCCA 301, the Court questioned the use of boilerplate language and reminded employers that restrictive covenants must be drafted with care.
Read More +
Boilerplate Non-Competition Clauses Are No Protection At All -
Be Wary of Ambiguity: A “Bonus” Lesson for Employers
November 2017
The recent BC Supreme Court case of Kenny v. Weatherhaven Global Resources Ltd., [2017] B.C.J. No. 1510 (S.C.) illustrates the perils of poorly drafted employment agreements.
Read More +
Be Wary of Ambiguity: A “Bonus” Lesson for Employers -
A Crack in the Dam? Merrifield v. Attorney General (Ont.) and the Undead Tort of Harassment
October 2017
For many years, workplace law has generally proceeded on the assumption that remedies for harassing behaviour and civil “harassment” were, except in rare cases, outside the purview of the courts. Harassment, as a civil wrong, had developed within the administrative structure of human rights tribunals and grievance processes under collective agreements but there was no generally recognized common law “tort” of harassment.
Read More +
A Crack in the Dam? Merrifield v. Attorney General (Ont.) and the Undead Tort of Harassment -
BC Court of Appeal Restores Human Rights Tribunal Decision to Dismiss Complaint
October 2017
In Francescutti v. Vancouver (City), 2017 BCCA 242, the British Columbia Court of Appeal restored a human rights tribunal decision to dismiss a complaint brought by a former City of Vancouver employee. The decision provides useful support for the ability of a respondent to succeed on an application to dismiss a complaint, despite the presence of some conflicting facts raising issues of credibility.
Read More +
BC Court of Appeal Restores Human Rights Tribunal Decision to Dismiss Complaint -
The Significant (and Avoidable) Costs of a Poorly Run Workplace Investigation
October 2017
A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal acts as a cautionary tale for all employers when it comes to conducting (or not conducting) workplace investigations.
Read More +
The Significant (and Avoidable) Costs of a Poorly Run Workplace Investigation -
B.C. Court Clarifies Limits on Departing Employee’s Use of Employer Information and Diversion of “Corporate Opportunity”
October 2017
In Sateri (Shanghai) Management Limited v. Vinall, 2017 BCSC 491, the B.C. Supreme Court summed up the law governing how far a departing employee can go in effectively assisting a new employer, including through sharing his or her current employer’s confidential information or in diverting a “corporate opportunity”. The case also confirms that substantial damages will only be awarded against an employee if the employer can show it has suffered a resulting financial loss.
Read More +
B.C. Court Clarifies Limits on Departing Employee’s Use of Employer Information and Diversion of “Corporate Opportunity” -
The Clause That Saved The Company $7 million: Is It Bionic or Just Good Drafting?
September 2017
Terminating the employment of a senior executive can be expensive business. In normal circumstances, a dismissed employee is entitled to be paid all the remuneration the employee would have received had he or she worked through the “reasonable notice period”. For some employees, this would mean payments on account of bonuses, stock plans and other performance metrics. However, these expenses can be managed if the employer puts proper employment contracts in place.
Read More +
The Clause That Saved The Company $7 million: Is It Bionic or Just Good Drafting?