Workers’ Compensation generally operates like a form of insurance in that it provides wage replacement and medical benefits to employees who are injured in the course of their employment.
The Alberta Court of Appeal clarified the law with respect to how long-term incentive plans should be treated when an employee is terminated.
Yes, it’s 2017, but gender discrimination continues to persist in many workplaces. Discrimination in employment on the basis of gender is contrary to human rights legislation and leaves an employer vulnerable to liability for its wrongful conduct.
So, you want to launch a business in Nova Scotia? Well, whether you want to disrupt the tech sector, break the Internet or brew some sour beer, you are going to need to understand what it means to be an employer subjected to a litany of employment laws.
Misetich v Value Village Stores Inc., 2016 HRTO 1229 (“Misetich”), a recent decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”) that considered an employee’s eldercare responsibilities, casts doubt on the correct legal test to be applied in cases of family status discrimination.
A recent arbitration decision from Alberta tackles a myriad of issues related to a positive post incident drug test.
In recent years, there have been many decisions on the enforceability and interpretation of termination clauses in employment contracts – which employers and their legal counsel read with both interest and apprehension.
The recent arbitration decision in Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1418 v New Brunswick (Justice and Public Safety), 2016 CanLII 50052 (NB LA) (July 28, 2016) highlights the dangers in failing to confront employee “bad” behaviour and being lax with policy enforcement and training.
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.
A recent labour arbitration decision out of Ontario considers an employer’s obligation to protect its employees from harassment via an employer’s presence on social media.