News & Events

When we act as counsel to employers, we can be confronted with policies and practices which often have been in place for a long time and may turn out to not actually be in compliance with employment standards requirements. If we work together, we can attempt to find a route typically to become compliant and

On June 30, 2018 the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “OHRC”) released its Annual Report, entitled Impact today, investment for tomorrow. The report tracks the steps taken by the OHRC from April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2018, to fulfil the commitments made in their 2017-2022 Strategic Plan. The report focuses on four main areas

The recent Ontario Human Rights Tribunal decision in Talos v. Grand Erie District School Board has shifted expectations on the ability of benefits plans to treat workers over 65 differently, on the basis that this is particular type of discrimination is excepted explicitly under the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Code“). When Bill 211, “An

“. . . the majority has chosen the winners by turning the First Amendment into a sword, and using it against workaday economic and regulatory policy . . . The First Amendment was meant for better things. It was not meant to undermine but to protect democratic governance – including over the role of public-sector

As many readers are already aware, the new Personal Emergency Leave provisions in s. 50 of the Employment Standards Act, as well as the provisions in the Regulations that provide an exemption to construction employers allowing them to pay .8% of an employee’s hourly rate or wages (“Personal Emergency Pay”) in lieu of providing paid

The Michaels v. Red Deer College decision of the Supreme Court of Canada from 1976 held that employees pursuing wrongful dismissal damages have a duty to mitigate their damages.  Mitigation earnings reduce the liability of the employer for damages during the notice period to the extent of those earnings.  But what if the terminated employee

In Law Society of British Columbia v Trinity Western University[1] and a companion appeal, Trinity Western University v Law Society of Upper Canada,[2] the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the appropriate test for reviewing the decisions of administrative tribunals that engage rights found in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This

The Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017[1] (“SFO”) comes into force on July 1, 2018, repealing and replacing the Electronic Cigarettes Act, 2015[2] and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act[3] (collectively, the “Repealed Acts”). Most notably for employers, the SFO contains new posting requirements for signs and prohibitions regarding the use of medical cannabis. The SFO expands on the

Ontarians head to the polls on June 7th, and the results could mean big changes for labour and employment law. While the Liberals are promising to maintain the status quo, the Progressive Conservatives are taking aim at future increases to the minimum wage and the NDP hopes to make sweeping changes to both the labour

On January 23, 2018, a senior British Columbia arbitrator, John Kinzie, released a significant decision concerning random drug and alcohol testing in unionized workplaces.  The decision, USW Locals 7884 and 9346 v. Teck Coal Ltd.[1] followed the ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada in Irving Pulp and Paper[2], and built upon on the arbitral