BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Lancaster House - ECPv6.15.4//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Lancaster House
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://lancasterhouse.com
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Lancaster House
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/New_York
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20230312T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20231105T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20231017T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20231205T160000
DTSTAMP:20260410T141308
CREATED:20230502T203908Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231013T144735Z
UID:8053-1697545800-1701792000@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Labour Relations Certificate - Fall (Virtual Program)
DESCRIPTION:In association with:Upon completion of this program\, participants will receive a certificate of completion and a digital credential. \nProgram Leader\nDaphne Taras\nDirector\, Centre for Labour Management Relations\nToronto Metropolitan University \nProgram Faculty\n\n \nBruce Curran\nAssociate Professor\, Faculty of LawUniversity of Manitoba \n\n\n \nChris Davidson\nSenior Program Lawyer and Researcher \n\n\n \nJillian Houlihan\nUnion CounselPink Larkin \n\n\n \nColin Johnston\nMediator/Arbitrator \n\n\n \nAvner Levin\nProfessor\, Lincoln Alexander School of Law\,Toronto Metropolitan University \n\n\n \nArchana Mathew\nIntern\, Arbitrator Development Program \nFormerly Grievance Officer\, OPSEU \n\n\n \nFrank Miller\nInstructor (Sessional) Lecturer\,Faculty Advisor – HR/OB Co-Op Program \n\n\n \nDionne Pohler\nAssociate Professor\, University of Saskatchewan \n\n\n \nBob Thompson\nProfessor\, Human ResourcesSeneca College of Applied Arts and Technology \n\n\n \nJennifer Wootton\nLawyer & Workplace Investigator \n\n\nProgram\nThe Labour Relations Certificate Program\, presented by Toronto Metropolitan University and Lancaster House\, is designed to provide individuals engaged in labour relations with the core skills and knowledge required to create and maintain productive union-management relationships that foster fair and efficient workplaces. \nTaught by Canada’s leading labour relations scholars and practitioners\, this program combines theory\, leading research\, and professional experience to provide an education that has immediate application in participants’ workplaces. \nProgram features \n\nAccess to leading Canadian experts in a small-group setting\nActive learning through group discussion\, case studies\, and simulations\nBalanced coverage of labour and management points of view\nManagement\, union\, and neutral attendees learn together\nExposure to diverse opinions and extensive knowledge of fellow participants\nVariety of speakers (academics\, lawyers\, practitioners\, subject-matter experts)\n\nWho should attend? \n\nHuman resources professionals\nUnion officers and representatives\nLawyers\nManagers\nMediators\nWorkplace investigators\n\n2023 Fall Schedule†The fall 2023 session of the Labour Relations Certificate Program will comprise of 8 sessions over 8 weeks\, and will take place on Tuesdays from 12:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. ET. \n†More detailed information coming soon. \nSample Agenda \nThe agenda below is for a previous offering of the program\, however\, content of the upcoming session will be substantially the same. \nLabour Relations Certificate CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours per session under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resources Professionals Association.\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 26 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/labour-relations-certificate-virtual-program/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Professional Learning Program
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/TMU-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231101
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231104
DTSTAMP:20260410T141308
CREATED:20230323T025919Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T182026Z
UID:6793-1698796800-1699055999@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Ottawa Labour Law Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nAnnie McKendy\nArbitrator\, Mediator\, and Investigator \n\n\n \nCaroline Richard\nEmployer Counsel\nBird Richard \n\n\n \nTroy Winters\nSenior Health and Safety Officer\nCanadian Union of Public Employees \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nChristopher Edwards\nEmployer Counsel\nSoloway Wright \n\n\n \nKelly O’Ferrall\nEmployer Counsel\nOsler\, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP \n\n\n \nTia Hazra \nEmployment Relations Officer\nProfessional Institute of the Public Service of Canada \n\n\n \nAlison Longmore\nUnion Counsel\nJewitt McLuckie & Associates LLP \n\n\nWednesday\, November 1\, 20239:00 am – 9:10 am ET – Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs \nPanel 1: Notable and Newsworthy: Major caselaw and legislative developments - 9:10 am – 10:25 am ET\nNotable and Newsworthy: Major caselaw and legislative developments\n\n\n \nChristopher Rootham\nBoard Member\nFederal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board (FPSLREB) \n\n\n \nCraig Stehr\nEmployer Counsel\nGowling WLG \n\n\n \nAmy Kishek\nLegal Counsel\nCanadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine recent significant developments in labour law. Panelists will address the latest cases on government intervention in collective bargaining\, lessons to be learned from emerging jurisprudence on COVID-19 policies\, and perennial issues such as privacy\, discipline\, and discrimination\, harassment\, and accommodation. The panel will also examine legislative updates including Canada’s ratification of the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention\, 2019\, and legislation dealing with forced labour. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most newsworthy developments. \nBreak: 10:25 am – 10:40 am ET \nPanel 2: Disabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with undiagnosed or poorly understood conditions - 10:40 am – 11:50 am ET \nDisabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with undiagnosed or poorly understood conditions\n\n\n \nWendy Laframboise\nNurse Practitioner\nCoordinator\, Post-Covid Rehab\nThe Ottawa Hospital Rehabilitation Centre \n\n\n \nMeg Steele\nActing Director\, Human Resources Services\nFinance and Corporate Services Department \n\n\n \nDina Mashayekhi\nUnion Counsel\nJewitt McLuckie \n\n\nChallenges often arise in accommodating employees with conditions that cannot be identified by a clear diagnostic test or that are not yet well-understood within the medical community. In this session\, experts will address these challenges\, answering questions such as: \n\nWhat are common medical conditions that elude diagnosis\, or that are considered “diagnoses of exclusion”? Why does “long COVID” fall within that list?\nIs a definitive diagnosis\, or “objective evidence\,” necessary to establish disability? How should employers and unions respond where there is a lack of available medical practitioners with the requisite knowledge or experience to assess and attest to the condition?\nHow can employers and unions effectively formulate requests for medical information where an employee’s condition cannot be confirmed using a clinician’s diagnostic test?\nWhen sick leave abuse is a concern\, how can an employer distinguish between employees who have genuine\, difficult-to-diagnose disabilities\, and employees who are feigning illness? May an employer discipline or dismiss an employee who is frequently absent\, underperforming\, or exhibiting atypical workplace behaviours but who asserts that it is due to an as-yet undiagnosed disability?\nHow do the stereotypes and stigmas associated with these medical conditions contribute to the challenge of providing accommodation?\n\nWhat types of accommodations may be of assistance to an employee suffering from persistent or chronic symptoms that may impact their ability to work? For example: What measures may assist an individual with long COVID?Lunch: 11:50 am – 1:00 pm ET \nKeynote - ReconciliACTION: Addressing TRC recommendations in legislation - 1:00 pm – 1:25 pm ET\nReconciliACTION: Addressing TRC recommendations in legislation\n\n\n \nStan Kutcher\nSenator\nSenate of Canada \n\n\nThe Criminal Code of Canada continues to provide legal protection for parents who use corporal punishment for purposes of correction against their children. Yet extensive research evidence shows that such violence has no positive effect but does result in short and long term harm. Bill S-251 seeks to remove section 43 of the Code to offer children the same protection from assault as all others living in Canada have. Senator Kutcher\, a child and adolescent psychiatrist\, will address this issue\, which has also been flagged by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC #6). Consideration of the responsibilities of parents and the rights of children in the context of today’s mental health realities will help frame this presentation. \nPanel 3: Breaking Barriers: Best practices in promoting equity\, diversity\, and inclusion in the workplace - 1:25 pm – 2:35 pm ET\nBreaking Barriers: Best practices in promoting equity\, diversity\, and inclusion in the workplace\n\n\n \nRichard Gaboton\nEDI Specialist\nThe Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) \n\n\n \nJena Montgomery\nCounsel\nTreasury Board Secretariat Legal Services\nDepartment of Justice \n\n\n \nKami Ramcharan\nPresident\nKVR Management Support \nMember\nEmployment Equity Act Review Task Force \n\n\nPromoting equity at work requires a commitment from workplace actors to remove barriers to participation and success\, to proactively support inclusion\, and to ensure that measures do not\, in fact\, perpetuate discriminatory practices. In this session\, experts will address the ongoing work of the Employment Equity Act Review Task Force and examine topics such as improving equity in promotion and retention\, the best means of effectively measuring equity efforts\, and the promise and peril of data in improving workplace equity. \nBreak: 2:35 pm – 2:50 pm ET \nPanel 4: Off-the-Clock Conduct: Reconciling employee free speech and employer reputational concerns - 2:50 pm – 3:55 pm ET\nOff-the-Clock Conduct: Reconciling employee free speech and employer reputational concerns\n\n\n \nDavid Jewitt\nArbitrator/Mediator\nJewitt Arbitration \n\n\n \nKyle Van Schie \nEmployer Counsel\nSoloway Wright \n\n\n \nChristine Johnson\nUnion Counsel\nChamp and Associates \n\n\nAn employee’s off-duty conduct can affect the reputation of a workplace\, impact the well-being of colleagues\, and lead to discipline or termination. In this session\, experts will examine employer and union rights and duties in promoting appropriate employee behaviour\, both within and beyond the workplace. Panelists will address questions including: \n\nCan employers limit employees’ off-duty conduct? Is the nature of the business relevant? When does an employee’s right to express personal opinions while off-duty become a legitimate concern for the employer?\nAre there any limits on an employer’s ability to monitor the physical or online activities of off-duty employees?\nWhat constitutes political speech or activity? Can an employer limit political speech or activity in the workplace? What about outside of the workplace?\nCan employers or unions offer or require training regarding what constitutes appropriate off-duty conduct?\nIn what circumstances have employees been disciplined or had their employment terminated for their off-duty conduct?\nWhat language should be incorporated into workplace policies and collective agreements to address off-duty conduct?\nWhat key terms should be included in employee social media policies?\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions seeking to balance employees’ freedom of expression and the need to ensure a workplace free of discrimination and harassment?\n\nDay 1 Closing Remarks: 3:55 pm – 4:00 pm ET \nNetworking reception: 4:00 pm – 5:00 pm ET \nThursday\, November 2\, 2023Introductory remarks by Co-chairs: 9:00 am – 9:10 am ET \nPanel 5: Asset or Adversary? Examining the implications of artificial intelligence for the world of work - 9:10 am – 10:25 am ET\nAsset or Adversary? Examining the implications of artificial intelligence for the world of work\n\n\n \nDr. Valerio De Stefano\nCanada Research Chair in Innovation Law and Society\, Osgoode Hall Law School\nYork University \n\n\n \nAndrew Vey\nEmployer Counsel\nWillets Vey \n\n\n \nLaura Ross\nBilingual Senior Officer\nLegal Branch CUPE \n\n\nWhen ChatGPT was launched less than a year ago\, the promises and dangers of advanced artificial intelligence moved from the annals of science fiction to the front page of newspapers. While fears about automation killing jobs are not unique to this latest technological revolution\, the concerns this time have shifted from work involving repetitive tasks and physical effort to white collar\, creative\, and intellectual work. The Writers’ Guild and SAG AFTRA strikes bear witness to the encroachment of machines into types of work that had long been thought to require uniquely human faculties. In this session a panel of experts will explore AI’s impact on the world of work and discuss the implications for labour relations: \n\nHow\, if at all\, are ChatGPT and similar AI applications different from previous AI programs? Do they “think”? Are they conscious? Are they creative?\nAre concerns about AI’s impact on work overblown? Is this technological advancement really different from previous technological revolutions that fomented their own concerns about mass unemployment and the dehumanization of work?\nWhat jobs and sectors will be most affected by AI? How should unions and employers use collective bargaining to address the potential impact of AI on those jobs and sectors?\nShould both employers and unions lobby government for increased regulation of AI and its effects on work and workers? If so\, what should they be asking for? Is there any common ground?\nWill human resources be taken over by “algorithmic management\,” which is defined as delegating to algorithms certain managerial tasks such as filtering through applications for employment\, assessing employee performance\, or even making decisions regarding termination of employment?\nHow should employers and unions address the potential use of algorithmic management in collective agreements? Do all collective agreements need to address this issue?\nCould AI take over some labour relations tasks like writing policies\, interpreting contract language\, drafting grievances\, researching law\, formulating arguments based on precedent\, or even deciding the outcome of grievances?\n\nBreak: 10:25 am – 10:40 am ET \nPanel 6: Fostering Diversity: Removing barriers to recruitment\, retention\, and promotion of neurodivergent employees - 10:40 am – 11:55 am ET\nFostering Diversity: Removing barriers to recruitment\, retention\, and promotion of neurodivergent employees\n\n\n \nVirginie Cobigo\nExecutive Director\, Open Collaboration for Cognitive Accessibility \nAssociate professor\nFaculty of Social Sciences\, School of Psychology\nUniversity of Ottawa \n\n\n \nDavid Patacairk\nLegal Counsel\nCity of Ottawa \n\n\n \nMorgan Rowe\nUnion Counsel\nRaven\, Cameron\, Ballantyne & Yazbeck LLP \n\n\nNeurodivergent Canadians\, i.e. those who have lifelong neurological or developmental conditions such as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)\, continue to face significant employment barriers despite growing recognition of the benefits of neurodiversity in the workplace. For example\, only about a third of working-age Autistic Canadians are employed\, and those who are employed are substantially more likely to be underemployed than the general population. In this session\, experts will explore why these barriers persist and offer guidance on providing accommodation to neurodivergent employees and jobseekers. \n\nWhy is the term “neurodivergent” used to describe people with learning disabilities\, ADHD\, and ASD? What do these conditions have in common? How are they different?\nHow do common stereotypes affect the inclusion and accommodation of neurodivergent employees in the workplace? What can be done to combat these stereotypes?\nShould workplace neurodiversity be actively promoted in the same way as other forms of organizational diversity? If so\, should jobseekers be required to provide medical documentation during the hiring process or should self-identification be accepted?\nWhat can employers and unions do to eliminate or reduce the barriers faced by neurodivergent jobseekers?\nWhy do many neurodivergent employees find it difficult to retain employment or advance at work?\nWhat accommodations are likely to help neurodivergent employees not only stay at work but thrive?\nWhat type of medical information can employers require from neurodivergent employees seeking accommodation? Should a detailed neuropsychological evaluation report be required?\nHow often\, if ever\, should updated medical information be requested from a neurodivergent employee\, who\, by definition\, has a lifelong condition?\nWhat accommodation should unions provide to neurodivergent members accessing union services and using union processes?\n\nLunch: 11:55 am – 1:00 pm ET \nPanel 7: Navigating the New World of Work: Addressing privacy\, accommodation\, conflict\, and collaboration in hybrid and remote work arrangements - 1:00 pm – 2:15 pm ET\nNavigating the New World of Work: Addressing privacy\, accommodation\, conflict\, and collaboration in hybrid and remote work arrangements\n\n\n \nIan Mackenzie\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nHeather Cameron\nEmployer Counsel\nNorton Rose Fulbright \n\n\n \nNatasha Udell\nIn-House Legal Counsel\nOntario Provincial Police Association \n\n\nAs some employers renew calls to return to in-person work\, parties have remained deeply divided over the promise and drawbacks that work-from-home arrangements pose for productivity and teamwork. In this session\, panelists will provide expert guidance on navigating these concerns\, addressing questions including: \n\nAre employers entitled to monitor the productivity of employees working from home through surveillance measures such as monitoring software? What lessons can be learned from how arbitrators have balanced employers’ interest in ensuring productivity with employees’ right to privacy in other contexts?\nWhen will misuse of working time rise to the level of “time theft”? How should employers address employees who use working time for other purposes while at home — such as napping\, doing laundry\, or looking after family members?\nWhat are emerging best practices for ensuring that a remote or hybrid working arrangement does not negatively impact creativity and collaboration? With many employees reporting increased loneliness arising from their work-from-home arrangements\, what proactive steps can be taken to foster well-being and connection among remote team members?\nIn what ways has shifting to a remote or hybrid work arrangement ameliorated or exacerbated workplace conflict\, harassment\, and discrimination? How can parties ensure that inappropriate workplace behaviours do not simply shift to forums that may be harder to monitor (e.g. online chats)?\nWhen will a decision to require employees to return to in-person work constitute an improper exercise of management rights? Is there a business case to be made for allowing remote or hybrid work\, even where an employer may otherwise legitimately require employees to return?\nWhen must an employee’s request for accommodation through a remote working arrangement be granted?\nDo employees returning to in-person work have a right to return to their former office space? How can workplace parties ensure “co-working” arrangements (such as desk “hoteling” or “hot-desking”) do not lead to increased conflict or health and safety hazards?\n\nBreak: 2:15 pm – 2:30 pm ET \nPanel 8: Investigating Investigations: An examination of current best practices and recent developments - 2:30 pm – 3:45 pm ET\nInvestigating Investigations: An examination of current best practices and recent developments\n\n\n \nKatherine Cotton\nLawyer and Workplace Investigator \n\n\n \nChristopher Edwards\nEmployer Counsel\nSoloway Wright \n\n\n \nJennifer Duff\nUnion Counsel\nShields Hunt Duff Strachan \n\n\nWorkplace investigations have evolved in recent years\, including an increased use of remote interviews and a focus on the impact of biases on the investigation process. In this session\, experts will discuss important developments in this area\, in addition to practices and policies that safeguard fair and effective investigations. The following questions will be discussed: \n\nWhat lessons can be learned from recent cases addressing the appropriate scope of an investigation\, considering the need to preserve a fair\, adequate\, and effective investigation process?\nWhat strategies can workplace parties implement to address the challenges of conducting investigations in a remote work environment? Is there any proven or perceived benefit to conducting workplace investigations in-person?\nHow can workplace investigators ensure that they are mindful of unconscious and implicit biases during the investigation process? What impact do these biases have on workplace investigations?\nWhat are best practices when it comes to incorporating a trauma-informed approach to conducting witness interviews during an investigation?\nHow can investigators effectively identify and address pervasive systemic discrimination in the workplace through the fact-finding and report-writing process? How can employers and unions support investigators in this endeavor?\nWhat measures should an employer take when an allegation is not substantiated? What role does the union have in restoring a safe and healthy workplace for all parties involved in these circumstances?\n\nDay 2 Closing Remarks: 3:45 pm – 3:55 pm ET \nFriday\, November 3\, 2023Workshop*Workshop sold separately from stand-alone conference. \nBreakfast: 8:00 am – 9:00 am ET \nMedical Information in Accommodation and Adjudication: Practical guidance for employers and unions - 9:00 am – 4:00 pm\n\n\n \nGoretti Fukamusenge\nBoard MemberFederal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board \n\n\n \nDr. Darcy A Santor\nPsychologistProfessorFaculty of Social SciencesUniversity of Ottawa \n\n\n \nSophie Arsenault\nEmployer CounselFasken \n\n\n \nNicole Butt\nManager of Litigation and Legal CounselOntario Nurses Association \n\n\n \nJudith Parisien\nEmployer Counsel\nFasken\n\n\nWorkplace parties may have a legitimate need to access and assess employee medical information throughout grievance and arbitration processes\, but it is crucial that they do so in a reasonable and appropriate manner. In this interactive workshop\, attendees will learn the legal framework governing the appropriate collection\, use\, and storage of employee health information; strategies for requesting\, obtaining\, and assessing information from healthcare professionals; and key principles relating to the use of medical information at arbitration. Guided by expert panelists\, attendees will leave ready to: \n\nAssess the reasonableness of requests for employees’ personal health information;\nEvaluate the adequacy of information provided;\nRespond appropriately to vague or deficient information;\nApproach employees/union members about needed information with sensitivity;\nDetermine what type of information should be obtained from different health care professionals and assess when specialist reports or independent medical examinations are necessary;\nRecognize when a health care professional is acting as an advocate or assuming an inappropriate role;\nSafeguard personal health information in compliance with legislation and in accordance with best practices; and\nUse medical evidence effectively in the grievance and arbitration process.\n\nConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\n\n\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 9.75 substantive hours.\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\n\nThe Ottawa Labour Law Post-Conference Workshops have been approved for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association\, each.\n\n\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting The Ottawa Labour Law Post-Conference Workshops for 5.5 substantive hours\, each.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/ottawa-labour-law-conference/
LOCATION:Rogers Centre Ottawa\, 55 Colonel By Drive\, Ottawa\, Ontario\, K1N 9J2\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Labour Law & Labour Policy
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/ottawa-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR