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:20240310T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20241103T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Halifax
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0300
TZNAME:ADT
DTSTART:20240310T060000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0300
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:AST
DTSTART:20241103T050000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20240425T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20240613T160000
DTSTAMP:20260422T112719
CREATED:20240220T165731Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240509T145540Z
UID:12368-1714048200-1718294400@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Labour Relations Certificate - Spring (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\nProfessor and Director\nCentre for Labour-Management Relations\nToronto Metropolitan University \nProgram Faculty\n\n \nFarah Baloo\nSenior Legal Counsel\, Legal Department\nUnifor \n\n\n \nSharmila Clark\nDirector\, Employment Law Division\nCity of Toronto \n\n\n \nBruce Curran\nAssociate Professor\, Faculty of Law\nUniversity of Manitoba \n\n\n \nChris Davidson\nSenior Program Lawyer and Researcher \n\n\n \nShana French\nEmployer Counsel\nSherrard Kuzz LLP \n\n\n \nDaryn Jeffries\nEmployer Counsel\nRae Christen Jeffries LLP \n\n\n \nAvner Levin\nProfessor\nLincoln Alexander School of Law\nToronto Metropolitan University \n\n\n \nIan Mackenzie\nArbitrator and Mediator \n\n\n \nFrank Miller\nDirector\, Executive and Corporate Education\nTed Rogers School of Management \n\n\n \nNathaniel Marshall\nEmployer Counsel and Workplace Investigator\nMarshall Workplace Law \n\n\n \nPeggy Nash\nSenior Advisor and Advisory Committee Chair\nCentre for Labour Management Relations\, Toronto Metropolitan University \n\n\n \nDionne Pohler\nAssociate Professor\nUniversity of Saskatchewan \n\n\n \nJim Stanford\nEconomist and Director\nCentre for Future Work \n\n\n \nBob Thompson\nProfessor\nHuman Resources\nSeneca College of Applied Arts and Technology \n\n\n \nNaheed Yaqubian\nLegal Counsel\nOntario Nurses’ Association \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\n2024 Spring Schedule†\nThe Spring 2024 session of the Labour Relations Certificate Program will comprise of 8 sessions over 8 Weeks and will take place on Thursdays from 12:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. E.T. beginning April 25\, 2024. \n\nSample Agenda\nCPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours per session.\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Nova Scotia for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours\, per session.\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.\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours per session.\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.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 3.5 substantive hours; 0 professionalism hours\, per session.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/labour-relations-certificate-spring-2024/
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:20240506
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20240509
DTSTAMP:20260422T112719
CREATED:20231109T142244Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T181944Z
UID:11158-1714953600-1715212799@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Atlantic Labour Law Conference: Current practices\, emerging trends
DESCRIPTION:Atlantic Labour Law ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nChris Peddigrew\nArbitrator / Mediator / Investigator\nPeddigrew Wade Law \n\n\n \nLeah Kutcher\nIn-House Counsel\nNova Scotia Teachers Union \n\n\n \nJames LeMesurier\nEmployer Counsel\nStewart McKelvey \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nErin Delaney\nSolicitor\nGovernment of Newfoundland & Labrador \n\n\n \nJill Houlihan\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nRyan McCarville\nEmployer Counsel\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nPaula Trites\nLabour Relations Officer\nNew Brunswick Union of Public Employees (NBU) \n\n\nMonday\, May 6\, 2024*Workshop sold separately from stand-alone conference. \nWorkshopDifficult Accommodations: Responding to denial\, defensiveness\, and personality disorders\n\n\n \nMichael MacDonald\nManager\, Health Services\nJazz Aviation \n\n\n \nBrad Proctor\nEmployer Counsel\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nWayne Thistle\nArbitrator/Mediator\nInnovative Dispute Resolution Inc. \n\n\nAccommodating employees with disabilities that impair their judgment\, perception\, and often their very ability to participate in the accommodation process itself can be challenging. Working through interactive exercises with the guidance of experts\, participants will develop the knowledge and skills to: \n\nComply with management and union responsibilities surrounding the accommodation process\, the duty to inquire\, obtaining medical records\, and related privacy legislation;\nUnderstand how common disabilities and related stigma may impede a worker’s ability to participate in the accommodation process;\nApply effective communication skills when interacting with defensive or resistant employees;\nComply with legal obligations when workers are unwilling or unable to participate in the accommodation process; and\nIdentify when the threshold of undue hardship has been reached.\n\nSchedule\nBreakfast and registration: 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. \nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 a.m. – 9:05 a.m. \nWorkshop: 9:05 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. \nBreak: 10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. \nWorkshop: 10:45 a.m. – 11:55 a.m. \nLunch: 11:55 a.m. – 1:05 p.m. \nWorkshop: 1:05 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nBreak: 2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. \nWorkshop and closing remarks: 2:45 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. \nTuesday\, May 7\, 20248:00 – 9:00: Registration and breakfast\n9:00 – 9:05: Opening Remarks \n9:05 – 10:35: Panel 1 - Atlantic Update: Experts examine key cases and legislative developments\n\n\n \nNancy F. Barteaux\, K.C.\nEmployer Counsel\nFounder and Principal\nBarteaux Labour and Employment Lawyers Inc. \n\n\n \nJames Farrell\nSolicitor and Staff Representative\nFFAW-Unifor \n\n\n \nBrittany Keating\nPartner\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nJohn Whelan\nArbitrator\nWhelan Dispute Resolution \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will analyze noteworthy legal developments\, discussing key cases and recent legislation. Topics to be addressed include: \n\nPrivacy;\nDiscipline;\nHealth and safety/workers’ compensation; and\n\nPanelists will also discuss recent provincial and federal legislative amendments\, including: \n\nPay equity;\nPay transparency;\nPensions;\nStrike replacements;\nSick time/sick notes;\nMinimum wages; and\nSupply chain transparency.\n\nFinal selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \n10:35 – 10:50: Break \n10:50 – 12:05: Panel 2 - Beliefs and Boundaries: Reconciling employee free speech and employer concerns\n\n\n \nIsabelle Keeler\nEmployer Counsel\nCox & Palmer \n\n\n \nLynne Poirier\nArbitrator/Mediator \nVice-Chair\nCanada Industrial Relations Board \n\n\n \nDaniel Wilband\nCounsel\nLawson Creamer \n\n\nA tension sometimes arises between employee free speech and an employer’s duty to ensure a safe and respectful workplace. How can these arguably competing rights and obligations be balanced? In this session\, a panel of experts will address these questions: \n\nWhat is the line between safeguarding employee free speech and ensuring a respectful and safe work environment? Do employees have the right to express their views on potentially controversial and/or political matters at work?\nCan employers discipline employees for private statements and/or expressions made outside the workplace?\nTo what extent will arbitrators consider Charter rights and values such as freedom of expression in the context of off-duty conduct?\nWhat is the extent of a union’s duty to represent members who face work-related consequences for their potentially polarizing beliefs? When will a union’s decision not to represent a member constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation?\n\n12:05 – 1:25: Networking Lunch \n1:25 – 2:10: Keynote - The Burnout Burger: The role of psychological safety in preventing burnout in the workplace\n\n\n \nDr. Dayna Lee-Baggley\nFounder & CEO\, Dr. Lee-Baggley and Associates \nAssistant Professor\, Faculty of Medicine\, Dalhousie University\nAdjunct Professor\, Psychology Department\, Saint Mary’s University \n\n\nRates of burnout have never been higher; however\, the conventional focus on self-care falls short. In this innovative presentation\, Dr. Dayna will present a more comprehensive strategy to address burnout known as the “Burnout Burger.” The Burnout Burger highlights that burnout is not just the responsibility of the individual. Instead\, the individual is squeezed between organizational and cultural factors that also influence burnout. Dr. Dayna will present the science of burnout and actionable strategies to address the Burnout Burger\, including the role of psychological safety in targeting burnout. Attendees will gain insight into cutting-edge\, evidence-based tips and techniques\, empowering individuals\, leaders\, and workplaces to effectively address burnout and foster the well-being of both employees and organizations. \n2:10 – 2:25: Break \n2:25 – 3:40: Panel 3 - Is it Harassment or Not? An interactive panel with case studies and scenarios\n\n\n \nFrank Demont\, K.C.\nArbitrator\nResolve Arbitration & Mediation Services \n\n\n \nChristina Kennedy\nSenior Labour Relations Counsel\nAir Line Pilots Association\, International \n\n\n \nMichelle A. Willette\nEmployer Counsel\nCox & Palmer \n\n\nIn many instances conduct or comments will clearly meet the definition of harassment. However\, in other cases debate may arise as to whether the alleged harasser knew or ought reasonably to have known that their behaviour was unwelcome\, offensive\, or harmful. In this session\, panelists will highlight the degree to which reasonable minds may disagree about whether certain comments or conduct constitute harassment\, probe the reasons behind such disagreement\, and address questions such as: \n\nShould a complainant’s subjective feelings of humiliation or offence be determinative of whether certain conduct constitutes harassment? If not\, why not?\nWhat role do a complainant’s personal characteristics – gender and race\, for example – play in determining whether certain conduct should be reasonably seen to be offensive? How might a decision-maker’s unconscious bias interfere in the analysis of whether conduct could reasonably be seen to be insulting or humiliating?\nDoes workplace culture play any role in determining whether conduct ought reasonably to have been known to be offensive?\nIs the analysis of whether conduct constitutes harassment affected by a friendship or previous romantic relationships between complainant and respondent? What about power imbalances or lack thereof?\nFrom the employer’s perspective\, how is the reasonableness of management action assessed to determine whether or not it constitutes harassment?\n\n3:40 – 3:45: Closing remarks \nWednesday\, May 8\, 20248:00 – 9:00: Registration and breakfast\n9:00 – 9:05: Opening Remarks \n9:05 – 10:20: Panel 4 - Facing the Public: Protecting workers from harassment and ensuring a safe workplace\n\n\n \nKiersten Amos\nEmployer Counsel\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nChantelle MacDonald Newhook\nArbitrator/Mediator/Investigator\nDispute Winners \nVice-Chair\nNewfoundland and Labrador Labour Relations Board \n\n\n \nKyle Rees\nUnion Counsel\nO’Dea Earle \n\n\nMany forward-facing employees may experience violence and/or harassment from third parties such as clients\, students\, patients\, customers\, etc. In this session\, experts will explore the scope of an employer’s legal duty to prevent third party violence against their employees\, the rights and duties of employees in these circumstances\, and the union’s role in preventing and responding to violence experienced by their membership. Questions to be addressed include: \n\nWhat legal obligations do employers have to protect their employees from third-party harassment? Should workplace violence and harassment policies include specific provisions for dealing with third parties who become violent towards employees?\nWhat steps must an employer take when they become aware that their staff are being harassed by a third party?\nDoes the legal obligation to protect the health and safety of employees extend to violence and harassment that occurs off-site? How do these obligations apply in the context of remote work?\nWhat obligations do unions have to support members who are facing violence and/or harassment from third parties/the public? In what circumstances should unions grieve an employer’s failure to protect employees from third party violence and/or pursue remedies through the Ministry of Labour/Labour Relations Board?\nWhat is the scope of an employee’s duty to report concerns about a patient\, student\, customer\, or client?\nWhat legal recourse is available to employees who have experienced violence or harassment from members of the public? In what circumstances may an employer be liable for discrimination and harassment perpetrated by non-employees or members of the public? What factors will an arbitrator consider when making this determination?\nIn what circumstances can employees refuse work on the basis that they believe they will experience violence from members of the public? Are there circumstances where workers who are excluded from the general right to refuse unsafe work under occupational health and safety legislation (i.e. police officers\, firefighters\, correctional officers\, and health care workers)\, can refuse unsafe work on the basis that a patient/client/ etc. poses a danger?\nWhat are the implications of Bill C-3\, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code\, which outlines enhanced protections for health care workers under the Criminal Code?\n\n10:20 – 10:35: Break \n10:35 – 11:50: Panel 5 - Working towards inclusion: Removing barriers to recruitment\, retention\, and promotion\n\n\n \nDavid Delaney\nEmployee Relations Consultant and Employment Equity Coordinator\nHalifax Employers Association \n\n\n \nMichael Gillingham\nUnion Counsel\nMartin Whalen Hennebury Stamp \n\n\n \nCarey Majid\nExecutive Director\nNewfoundland and Labrador Human Rights Commission \n\n\nAs concepts of workplace equality\, diversity\, and inclusion continue to evolve\, many organizations are turning to new initiatives to address systemic discrimination in workplaces. In this session\, experts will discuss: \n\nHow can systemic discrimination manifest in the workplace\, and how can it be identified?\nHow can employers and unions proactively address impacts of systemic discrimination in the workplace?\nHow can systemic barriers manifest during hiring processes? How can employers best implement fair hiring practices to avoid discrimination and promote a more diverse workforce?\nHow can systemic barriers manifest during promotion processes? How can employers and unions best address and combat these barriers?\nWhat policy changes can employers implement to prevent unintentional discriminatory consequences?\nIs collective agreement language effective in fostering equity and creating a respectful workplace culture?\nWhat steps are unions and workplaces taking to advocate for non-discriminatory workplace practices?\n\n11:50 – 1:00: Lunch \n1:00 – 2:15: Panel 6 - Investigating Investigations: Examining current practices and recent caselaw\n\n\n \nLisa Gallivan\nArbitrator\, Mediator and Workplace Investigator \n\n\n \nAndrea MacNevin\nEmployer Counsel\nBarteaux Labour and Employment Lawyers Inc. \n\n\n \nRon Pizzo\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\nIn this session\, expert panelists will examine recent caselaw addressing workplace investigations and will explore key principles and best practices in conducting fair\, adequate\, and effective investigations into human rights-related allegations. The panel will address questions including: \n\nWhat lessons can be learned from recent cases as to what constitutes a fair and adequate investigation process? What procedural flaws have been found to render an investigation unfair or inadequate?\nWhen is retaining a third-party investigator necessary? What other alternatives are possible?\nCan the grounds for an investigation be expanded after the investigation has already been commenced – for example\, if an investigation reveals issues of systemic discrimination?\nWhat are best practices for countering unconscious and implicit bias and otherwise ensuring stereotypes and discrimination do not impact the investigatory process? How should investigatory meetings be approached where the person being interviewed has or is suspected to have a disability?\nHow much latitude do employers have to order investigations into off-duty conduct? May workplace investigators demand to examine employees’ personal devices\, such as laptops or cellphones which employees use exclusively or primarily for personal purposes?\nHow should employers and unions approach investigations into workplace conduct which may have a criminal element?\nWhat legal avenues are available to employees who wish to challenge what they believe to be an unfair or improper investigation into their human rights allegations?\n\n2:15 – 2:30: Break \n2:30 – 3:45: Panel 7 - Addressing the Unknown: Arbitrators respond to the use of artificial intelligence\n\n\n \nRobert Basque\nArbitrator\nForbes Roth Basque \n\n\n \nBrenda Comeau\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nNoella Martin\nEmployer Counsel\nBurchell Wickwire Bryson LLP \n\n\nGiven the lack of Canadian arbitration decisions on the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) to select and manage employees\, this session will provide employers and unions with the best available insight into how grievances against such uses of AI would be mounted\, defended\, and decided. Experienced union and management counsel will join an arbitrator to discuss a union challenge to algorithmic management drawn from US caselaw and a challenge to a program designed to vet job candidates. Specific issues to be addressed include: \n\nWhat principles in existing arbitral jurisprudence or legislative provisions could be invoked to challenge an employer’s use of algorithmic management (i.e. use of AI and data to manage employees)?\nCan employers rely on management rights to justify the use of AI to evaluate employee performance and manage employees?\nWhat arguments for and against the use of algorithmic management would arbitrators in the Atlantic provinces find most compelling?\nWhat legal concerns are raised when an employer uses AI to assess candidates’ suitability for positions?\nWhat privacy concerns are raised by using AI to evaluate job applicants based on their internet activity?\n\n3:45 – 3:50: Closing remarks \nCPDConference CPD\n\nThis program has been approved for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours under Category A of the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association (HRPA).\n \n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Nova Scotia for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of CPHR Newfoundland & Labrador may consider counting this program for 9.75 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\nThis program has been approved for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Category A of the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association (HRPA).\n \n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Nova Scotia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of CPHR Newfoundland & Labrador may consider counting this program for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/atlantic-labour-law-conference/
LOCATION:Halifax Convention Centre\, 1650 Argyle Street\, Halifax\, Nova Scotia\, B3J 0E6\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Labour Law & Labour Policy
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/atlantic-ll-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR