School Re-Opening and Issues for Employers

In some form or another, it’s looking like in-person learning will be going ahead this school year but that parents can keep their children home if they wish. In many cases, employers whose operations have been remote for the past several months are looking to bring employees back to the office. What if an employee doesn’t want to send their child back to school and subsequently insists that they cannot, therefore, come back into the office to work? What are an employer’s options?

Ask Why

If an employee will not be sending their child to school and insists that they too need to remain at home, ask why. While all things COVID-19 present novel legal situations, and we don’t yet have any certainty on how courts and tribunals will rule, it’s reasonable to assume that if your employee has a legitimate disability-related COVID-19 exposure concern this should be accommodated. Asking your employee why they are not sending their child to school allows them to raise their need for accommodation. 

Read More

Non-Solicit Provisions in Employment Contracts – What You Need to Know

Many restrictive convenants in agreements unenforceable

Image by Edar from Pixabay

We get a lot of questions from employers and employees about restrictive covenants. Many employment contracts include a restrictive covenant – a contractual clause that seeks to limit an employee’s ability to solicit the employer’s clients and/or employees and/or to compete for those same clients in the same geographical area once the employee leaves the employer.

Courts generally find restrictive covenants in employment agreements unenforceable, unless they are reasonable between the parties and not adverse to the public interest. Typically, if a restrictive covenant is ambiguous with regards to time, activity or geography, it will not be enforceable. Let’s take a look at non-solicit agreements.

Read More

Changes to the CEWS

The federal government has passed Bill C-20, An Act respecting further COVID-19 measures, which makes changes to the  Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) program. For those so inclined, here is the full text of the Bill. 

New Criteria for Eligibility

Starting with period 5 (which began on July 5), employers will no longer have to show a decline in revenue of 30%. Most employers (as long as they meet the definition of eligible employer) will be eligible for the CEWS and will not need to show a revenue reduction of 30%, as was previously required.  

Read More

Attention Employers with Employees on the IDEL!

The state of emergency in Ontario ended on July 24, 2020. This means a new clock has started ticking for employers with employees on what were temporary layoffs but were then converted into deemed Infectious Disease Emergency Leaves (IDEL) by O. Reg 228/20. While this sounds confusing, basically if your employees are off work involuntarily (you told them to stop working vs. they asked to take a leave) then they have been on a deemed…

Read More

Family Status Accommodation in the Time of COVID-19

Employer obligations to accommodate work refusals under the IDEL

Photo by August de Richelieu from Pexels

As workplaces re-open, employers are getting all kinds of objections from employees about coming back to work. Common among these are childcare responsibilities. While some daycares and day camps are operating, things are far from normal. What obligation do employers have to accommodate refusals to come back to work due to childcare responsibilities? 

Employee Protection Under the Infectious Disease Emergency Leave

In Ontario, employees who claim they cannot work due to childcare responsibilities may have job protection under the Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (IDEL). The IDEL provides job protection to employees who need to take a leave from work to care for their children whose school or daycare is closed because of COVID-19. The Ministry of Labour Guide on this leave also includes day camps being cancelled as a reason for the leave so we can be sure that the protection is meant to be expansive. 

Read More

Employers Get Out Your Contracts: An Important Ruling on Termination Provisions

enforceability of specific termination provisions

Image by Edar from Pixabay

This Ontario Court of Appeal decision has been the talk of the town on all the Ontario employment law blogs and while we don’t like to be followers, we also wanted to make sure our readers did not miss this important decision. In Waksdale v. Swegon North America Inc. the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled on the enforceability of specific termination provisions in an employment contract, finding the “without cause” termination provision enforceable because of a flaw in the “with cause” provision. 

Courts frequently come up with new ways of invalidating employer drafted termination provisions that would restrict an employee’s entitlement to notice. The enforceability of termination provisions is what lots of employment cases are about. A properly drafted termination provision in an employment contract can significantly limit an employee’s entitlement to notice of termination. For example, a long service employee terminated “without cause” could be entitled to as little as 8 weeks or as much as 2 years of notice depending on the contract. 

Read More
Back To Top