By Heather Hettiarachchi
In the much anticipated decision of McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP issued today, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Mr. McCormick, previously an equity partner of Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP (“Fasken”), could not avail himself of the protection afforded to employees pursuant to s. 13 of the British Columbia Human Rights Code (the “Code“), as his relationship with the firm was not that of an employee.
By Heather Hettiarachchi
In the much anticipated decision of McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP issued today, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Mr. McCormick, previously an equity partner of Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP (“Fasken”), could not avail himself of the protection afforded to employees pursuant to s. 13 of the British Columbia Human Rights Code (the “Code“), as his relationship with the firm was not that of an employee.
By Heather Hettiarachchi
On January 10th of this year, the Criminal Justice Branch (“CJB”) issued a statement that it would not be approving any regulatory charges against Babine Forest Products (“Babine”) in respect of the January 20, 2012 fire and explosion at Babine’s mill in Burns Lake, BC, which claimed the lives of two workers and injured 20 others (the “Incident”). The basis for CJB’s decision not to proceed with regulatory charges against Babine (the “CJB Decision”) was its finding that the investigation conducted by WorkSafeBC into the Incident, was flawed.
By Heather Hettiarachchi
Less than a week ago, on February 7, 2014, in Bernard v. Canada (Attorney General), the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that it is not a violation of privacy for unions to collect personal contact information of all employees who pay union dues, even if such employees are not members of the union.
The BC Court of Appeal recently released decisions in two cases that were the subject of previous Work Place Post articles.
In the September 2012 issue, we discussed the Allen v. Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd. decision. In that case, Ainsworth Lumber advised the employee that he would be terminated in 15 months. The employee was not required to report to work during that 15 month period, but was paid his full salary and benefits. At trial, the BC Supreme Court held that putting the employee on a “garden leave” constituted a wrongful dismissal and awarded the employee 15 months “pay in lieu”.
By Allyson Baker
Dismissing an employee without notice on the basis of “cause” can only be justified by misconduct of the most serious kind and it is often difficult for employers to successfully argue a “with cause” termination. The recent BC Supreme Court decision of Steel v. Coast Capital Savings Credit Union indicates that violation of trust placed by an employer on an employee may be sufficient to justify a “with cause” termination. The termination in this case arose from an employee’s unauthorized access of a document held in the personal folder of another employee, which was located on the employer’s computer network.
By Heather Hettiarachchi
In a decision issued on May 21, 2013 in Construction and Specialized Workers’ Union, Local 1611 v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), the Federal Court of Canada has dismissed a union challenge to the hiring of 201 foreign nationals by a Canadian mining company.
The Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC), the Bureau de normalisation du Québec (BNQ) and CSA Group have released Canada’s first national standard focused on promoting a psychologically healthy and safe workplace (the “Standard”). Providing systematic guidelines to identify and deal with psychological hazards in the workplace, the Standard can be used by any organization, regardless of size and complexity, to supplement existing efforts or to create new policies and processes.
By Allyson Baker
In a mobile world where many employment tasks can be performed remotely, it is not uncommon for employees to change work locations, moving to another part of the province, across Canada or to other parts of the world, while continuing to work for the same employer. However, in two 2012 decisions, Staley v. Squirrel Systems of Canada Ltd. and Ernst v. Destiny Software Productions Inc., the BC Supreme Court made it clear that an employee is not entitled to insist that the employer must agree to relocate an employee to a location of the employee’s choosing, absent a contractual term providing for such a right. Accordingly, if the employee moves without the employer’s permission, it would entitle the employer to terminate the employee for cause.