On January 2, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its first decision of 2019: Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc. et al. While the new year is just getting started, this decision is likely to be one of the most significant from an employment law perspective. Its implications are far-reaching and raise novel compliance challenges for Ontario employers that contract to resolve workplace disputes by way of private arbitration.

When an employee is fired and not given sufficient notice, a common point of dispute becomes how to properly calculate the lost value of non-monetary benefits. Wages, by contrast, are a relatively simple affair. If a court orders the employee ought to have received an additional three (3) months’ notice, the parties need only calculate the value of three months’ wages and any resulting interest for the delay in payment.

Manchester may be best known for its premiership football teams and spawning the likes of Oasis and The Smiths, however, the City was in the headlines last month for something quite different: its Student Union (“MUSU”) voted to replace clapping at all of its events with “jazz hands” (i.e. the practice of waving open hands in the air).

This week on Twitter, our firm has been examining the minimum wage from a variety of perspectives. Using the hashtag #minimumwageweek, we shared content ranging from videos of famed economists such as Milton Friedman to historical articles on the original debate when Ontario’s minimum wage was first introduced in 1963.

On October 23, 2018 the Ford government presented Bill 47, the Making Ontario Open for Business Act. Bill 47 is set to repeal a large portion of Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, which was passed into law by the previous provincial government just 11 months ago.

Wrongful dismissal disputes are fairly common. In our experience they often resolve through negotiation and infrequently progress far into the litigation process. That said, sometimes cases of this nature do reach the court room and the parties usually fight over the quantum of severance sought, the type of payments claimed (i.e. bonus/commissions) and whether the former employee made reasonable efforts to find re-employment.

According to Restaurants Canada, the Canadian food service industry employs over 1.2 million people. With so many people involved in this industry, whether as franchise owners, professional chefs or part-time servers, it is important to be aware of the workplace rights and obligations that apply. The food services industry is in many ways unique, facing safety and cost challenges that many other sectors do not. With that in mind, we set out to provide an overview of some key employment rights and obligations:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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?