Publications
-
The Supreme Court of Canada further clarifies the rights of workers
On January 30, 2015, in the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan (2015 SCC 4) decision, the Supreme Court of Canada further clarified the scope of the rights of workers pursuant to section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”). Indeed, in its 2007 decision (…)
-
Ditomene c. Boulanger, the next round: the Court of Appeal holds that procedural fairness rules need not be followed in the context of an employer’s investigation into alleged harassment
In a unanimous decision dated November 17, 2014,1 the Court of Appeal of Québec held that the procedural fairness rules applicable in administrative and public law do not apply in the context of a psychological harassment investigation conducted by an employer. As a result, the Court set aside the (…)
-
An employer can file a counter claim against an employee in the context of proceedings instituted by the Commission des normes du travail in order to enforce the right of set-off
In Commission des normes du travail v. Compagnie d'assurances Standard Life du Canada,1 (the “Standard Life of Canada case”), the Court of Québec allowed an employer to file a counterclaim against an employee in the context of proceedings instituted by the Commission des normes du travail (“CNT”) on (…)
-
A pregnant worker’s right to benefits in the event of preventive withdrawal pursuant to section 36 of the AROHS does not apply to a business under federal jurisdiction: Éthier v. Commission des lésions professionnelles
This decision of the Superior Court of Québec addresses a pregnant worker’s right to preventive withdrawal where said worker is employed by a business under federal jurisdiction.1 In this case, questions of constitutional jurisdiction were raised and the Superior Court confirmed that article 36 of (…)
-
The Asphalte Desjardins matter: the Supreme Court of Canada overturns the decision of the Québec Court of Appeal
On July 25, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision inQuébec (Commission des normes du travail) v. Asphalte Desjardins inc.1 In this ruling, which overturned a judgment by the Québec Court of Appeal,2 the Supreme Court concluded that an employer who receives notice of termination (…)
-
Right to refuse to work and preventive withdrawal: the Dionne v. Commission scolaire des Patriotes case
In Québec, the objective of the Act Respecting Occupational Health and Safety1 (the “Act”) is the elimination, at the source, of dangers to the health, safety and physical well-being of workers. Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision in the Dionne v. Commission scolaire des (…)
-
The Wal-Mart Decision: The Supreme Court of Canada confirms that the collective dismissal of the employees of the Jonquière establishment constituted an illegal change in their conditions of employment under section 59 of the Labour Code[1]
THE FACTSWal-Mart Canada Corporation (hereinafter “Wal-Mart”) opened its Jonquière establishment in 2001. After the United Food and Commercial Workers, local 503 (hereinafter the “Union”), was certified to represent the employees in 2004, negotiations were initiated in view of concluding a first (…)
-
Notice to employers under federal jurisdiction: amendments to the Canada Labour Code will take effect on October 31, 2014
On December 12, 2013, A second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measures1 (“Bill C-4”) received royal assent. Bill C-4, which consists of more than 300 pages, proposes a significant number of legal amendments, some of which relate to (…)
-
Serious breaches of the duty of loyalty by a human resources employee – Dismissal upheld by the C.R.T.
The Commission des relations du travail, both in its initial decision and on review, dismissed the complaints challenging the dismissal of an employee despite the absence of prior disciplinary measures. The complainant, who was hired in April 2011, held a position as an administration technician for (…)
-
Employees and the Cost of Justice: The Court of Appeal of Québec concludes that a complaint pursuant to section 124 of the Act Respecting Labour Standards (the Act) is admissible despite the existence of an internal arbitration procedure
THE FACTSThe complainant, a non-unionized employee, was hired by McGill University (hereinafter the “University”) in 1987 to be a member of the administrative staff. After working as an administrative assistant since 1994, she was dismissed by the University on June 30, 2009 for fraud. The (…)
-
Heavy burden for employers respecting mitigation of damages for lost salary: following dismissal, an employee who makes no effort to mitigate his damages may still be entitled to an indemnity
The Court of Appeal recently reviewed the scope of the duty of employees to mitigate their damages for lost salary pursuant to section 128(2) of the Act respecting labour standards (ARLS).1In this case, the Court of Appeal allowed in part the appeal of an employee following a decision of the (…)
-
Fieldturf Tarkett inc. v. Gilman(1): The Court of Appeal upholds the payment of « phantom share » bonuses where employment has been terminated without a serious reason
THE FACTSOn January 22, 2014, the Court of Appeal of Québec confirmed the 2012 decision of the Superior Court of Québec in Gilman v. Fieldturf Tarkett inc.2 At issue in this case was whether the payment of so-called “phantom share” bonuses were to be paid to employees whose employment (…)
-
Quarterly legal newsletter intended for accounting, management, and finance professionals, Number 23
CONTENTS The 2014 Federal Budget Plan sounds the death knell for two family tax planning measures much appreciated by entrepreneurs and some professionals The Expert and the Court You signed a contract for services... with an employee? How to properly identify the relationship between the (…)