Accommodating Employees at Christmas

Are employers required to accommodate an employee at Christmas?  

Accommodating Employees at Christmas

If an employee requests December 25 off for “family time” or religious events, are those protected grounds under Canadian human rights law?  This arises in industries that stay open 365 days a year, such as hospitals, public transit, variety stores, movie theatres and some restaurants.  For those employees working in these industries, can an employee request accommodation to have December 25 off on the grounds of family status or religion? 

Read More

It’s All in the Timing: The Best and Worst Times to Terminate Employees

The English magician Tony Corinda once said: “Good timing is invisible. Bad timing sticks out a mile”. As employment lawyers, we talk a lot about the “why”, “what” and definitely the “how much” of terminating an employee, but the “when” is a sometimes overlooked aspect. Some termination timing issues are a question of best practice or common courtesy, while others can attract significant legal liability and can be costly for employers. An employee who is being terminated may not recognize an employer’s considerate timing, but they will certainly recognize inconsiderate timing, and this will make everything go a lot less smoothly. 

It’s All in the Timing: The Best and Worst Times to Terminate Employees

When should you not terminate an employee? 

Discrimination 

It is contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Code”) to terminate or otherwise discriminate against an employee because of a protected ground. The protected grounds under the Code are citizenship, race, place of origin, ethnic origin, colour, ancestry, disability, age, creed, sex/pregnancy, family status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and record of offences. 

Read More

Don’t Lose Your Enforceable Termination Clause to the Substratum Doctrine

If you’re an employer or HR representative well-acquainted with the realm of employment law blogs, you’ve undoubtedly encountered a myriad of cautionary tales about the perils of contracting errors.  The blogs about this topic are countless – and for good reason! The significance of getting contracts right cannot be overstated, as a single mistake could potentially lead to substantial liabilities for your organization. An omitted phrase or a misused word within a termination clause could be the deciding factor between an 8-week statutory notice obligation and a hefty 24-month damages award.

The significance of getting contracts right

However, let’s assume that you’ve taken every precaution. You’ve carefully reviewed your contracts, consulted legal experts, and you’re confident that your termination clauses are impeccably drafted. Is there still a risk that a court would refuse to enforce that termination clause?  The answer, perhaps unsurprisingly, is yes.  Even with meticulous drafting, there’s a legal principle that could potentially invalidate your termination clause – the Substratum Doctrine.

Read More

Thinking of Implementing a Four-Day Workweek? Be Mindful of the Potential Legal Implications

In this current work climate, it’s all about work-life balance. Employees know what they want and if it’s not being offered at one job, they will search for it elsewhere. This has employers scrambling to offer higher salaries, greater benefits, hybrid or remote work options, or even four-day work weeks to keep up with the competitive job market. All these perks seem fine and dandy to attract employees but if you’re considering a shift to a four-day workweek, it’s important to know the legal implications this could impose.

Legal Implications of Implementing a Four-Day Workweek?

How do Four-Day Workweeks Work?

Four-day workweeks can be implemented in different ways depending on the nature of your business. Typically, employees work their same (8-hour) workdays but only four days a week, meaning they are only working 32-hour workweeks, while still receiving the same pay and benefits. Alternatively, some businesses have changed their daily working hours to 10-hour days but only four days a week, amounting to a usual 40-hour workweek. Another tactic is employees agreeing to a reduced-hour workweek while also reducing their pay to compensate for the difference.

Read More

Do Employers Have to Provide Reference Letters? The Legal Lowdown

Ah, reference letters, those elusive pieces of paper that can make or break a job seeker’s dreams. But here’s the deal: employers are not an employee’s personal fan club. They don’t have an obligation to shower employees with praise in the form of reference letters.

Before employers start feeling like kings on a throne, let’s explore the legal and strategic considerations surrounding reference letters and how they can impact an employer’s business.

No Obligation, No Problem

Let’s start with the undeniable truth: employers are under no legal obligation to hand employees a glittering reference letter, as affirmed by the Ontario Court of Appeal (2007 ONCA 573). So employers can rest easy, knowing that you’re not compelled to write letters of recommendation for every departing employee.

Read More

“Loud Quitting” – How Employers Can Manage this Trend

Loud Quitting” - How Employers Can Manage this Trend

Back in September, we delved into the issue of “quiet quitting” and discussed how employers can manage their quiet quitting employees. Recently, we’ve seen a new, flip-side, trend of employee’s “loud quitting”.

No employer wants a disgruntled employee making a dramatic exit from their workplace and potentially spewing ill words about the workplace. So, here are some legal tactics for employers to mitigate potential damages to their company or reputation related to loud quitting employees. 

What is Loud Quitting?

“Loud quitting” refers to an employee making a very public and disruptive departure from their job, often with the intent to call attention to perceived injustices or mismanagement at their workplace. This can take various forms, such as dramatic farewell emails, social media posts, public speeches, or even videos. While these methods may give an employee a sense of vindication or catharsis, they can potentially cause damage to a company’s reputation and morale among the remaining employees.

 

Read More
Back To Top