Dismissal Following Positive Drug Test Excessive form of Discipline, Alberta...
A recent arbitration decision from Alberta tackles a myriad of issues related to a positive post incident drug test.
A recent arbitration decision from Alberta tackles a myriad of issues related to a positive post incident drug test.
An employee in Ontario was awarded bonus payments for the applicable reasonable notice period following a without cause termination despite the bonus plan’s express terms that personal and company objectives must be met and the employee must be actively employed.
The Health Authority sued a contractor and the City of Corner Brook with regards to damage to a hospital building and its contents, due to flooding from a sewer back-up. In their pleadings, the defendants admitted that the Authority owned the building.
In the context of a unionized work environment, it is generally the case that when an employee is found to be terminated without cause, the employee is ordered to be reinstated.
The law of drug and alcohol testing in Canada is in a state of evolution. While the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 30 v Irving Pulp & Paper Ltd., 2013 SCC 34, provided important guidance on the strict standard that employers must meet in order to subject employees to random testing, it raised many questions regarding how those principles would be applied to other forms of testing.
It is time to revisit the topic of Host Liability and what an employer can do to ensure the holiday party is the social event of the year and not a litigation nightmare.
In Evans v Avalon Ford (1996) Limited, 2015 NLTD(G) 100, the employee, Mr. Evans, was Fleet Manager at the Avalon Ford auto dealership, the largest Ford dealership in Atlantic Canada (the “Dealership”), for more than 12 years. On the morning of Thursday, June 10, 2010, a meeting was called by Mr. Wilkins, the Dealership’s owner to discuss an error regarding the delivery of a commercial vehicle without appropriate paperwork being completed.
In June 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada weighed in on the issue of random alcohol testing in Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 30 v. Irving Pulp & Paper, Ltd, 2013 SCC 34 (“Irving”). Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Alberta Arbitration Board (the “Board”) recently issued a decision concerning the random drug and alcohol testing policy of Suncor Energy Inc., Oil Sands (“Suncor”). The union in this case, Unifor Local 707A, (“Unifor”) represents over 3,000 employees at Suncor’s oil sands operation in Fort McMurray, Alberta.
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 30 v. Irving Pulp & Paper Ltd., 2013 SCC 34
On June 14, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a decision that affirmed the role of alcohol testing in the workplace. The Court upheld the arbitrator’s decision which prohibited the employer’s random alcohol testing policy.
The decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Imperial Oil Ltd. v. Communications, Energy & Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 900, [2009] O.J. No. 2037 [“Imperial”] marks yet another victory for employee privacy rights in the collective bargaining sector.