Labour standards law requiring just cause for dismissal trumps contract provision denying access to arbitration, top court rules
Posted August 30, 2010
A provision of Quebec's Act respecting Labour Standards (ALS), which provides that no employee in the province with at least two years of continuous service for the same employer can be dismissed without just and sufficient cause, supersedes collective agreement provisions that deny access to arbitration to employees with such service, even if they are employed on a casual or probationary basis, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.
In a July 29, 2010 decision that dealt together with two cases that raised essentially the same central issues, the Supreme Court also ruled that, although the pertinent ALS provision, s.124, is not incorporated into collective agreements because the wording of the legislation does not indicate an intention to do this, s.124 voids any collective agreement provisions that are in conflict with it because the Act is "public order" legislation. Finally, the Court ruled that the jurisdiction to hear employment termination cases (and to apply the ALS) rests with arbitrators under the collective agreement (here, covering Quebec public service employees) rather than the Quebec Labour Relations Board because the remedies available to arbitrators are equivalent to those under the Act. (more)
Appeal court rules out employer liability for mental distress of employees in non-unionized setting, unless it results from bad faith firing – action for negligent infliction of mental suffering rejected
Posted July 5, 2010
Ruling that the common law tort of negligent infliction of mental suffering does not exist in the employment context, the Ontario Court of Appeal has held that employers do not have a duty of care to shield employees throughout the course of their employment from acts that might cause them mental distress.
In a May 28, 2010 decision that dealt with the constructive dismissal of a Bell Mobility employee who was shoved by her supervisor and then presented with a Performance Improvement Plan regarding her work instead of an apology, the Court also held that while an action for the tort, i.e. civil wrong, of intentional, as opposed to negligent, infliction of mental suffering is available to employees, it had not been made out in the present case. Partially allowing the employer's appeal, the Court reduced the trial judge's award of more than $500,000 in employment and tort damages to just under $148,000. (more) |
Disability & Accommodation
- Was dismissal of disabled employee for excessive absenteeism justified?
- Is chronic pain stemming from psychological factors a disabling illness for purposes of LTD benefits?
Discharge & Discipline
- Did employee's breach of last chance agreement justify dismissal?
- Fired for abandoning post, was remorseful paramedic entitled to reinstatement?
- Is top-up of EI benefits payable to pregnant staff during unpaid summer breaks?
- What is remedial template for violations of B.C.'s legislated class size/composition standards?
Health Care Employment Law
- Did firing of addicted employee committed to obtaining treatment amount to discrimination?
- Was hospital required to consider reassignment of employees who refused recommended flu vaccine?
Health & Safety/Workers’ Compensation Law
- Did threat of discipline amount to illegal reprisal for refusal to work based on perceived danger?
- Is award of damages at arbitration for workplace injury precluded where workers' compensation is available?
Human Rights and Workplace Privacy
- Do pre-employment credit checks breach job applicants' privacy rights?
- Did firing of employee for testing positive for drugs mean that he was perceived to be a drug addict?
Labour Arbitration
- Does principal's order to remove "staff representative" sign violate Charter of Rights?
- Did divorced dad qualify for paid leave when he stayed home to care for a daughter suspected of having H1N1 virus?
Public Service & Crown Agency Employment Law
- Where grievance procedure exists, does court lack jurisdiction to entertain claim of possible "whistle-blower"?
- Will human rights complaint be dismissed where complainant fails to assist in search for accommodation?
|
Dogs are people too
