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/Halifax
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0300
TZNAME:ADT
DTSTART:20230312T060000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0300
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:AST
DTSTART:20231105T050000
END:STANDARD
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: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:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Toronto
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:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20230101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20240417
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20240418
DTSTAMP:20260611T071619
CREATED:20231201T180316Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240416T143027Z
UID:11468-1713312000-1713398399@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Gender Equity Virtual Conference: Paving the way to inclusive workplaces
DESCRIPTION:This event takes place from 12:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. ET \nGender Equity Virtual ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nJan Borowy\nPay Equity Administrator\nCanadian National Office\nUnited Steelworkers (USW) \n\n\n \nKristen Woo\nLegal Counsel\nBC Public School Employers’ Association \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nKristine Barr\nHuman Rights Representative\nCanadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE)\, Manitoba Regional Office \n\n\n \nNathaniel Marshall\nEmployer Counsel/Workplace Investigator\nMarshall Workplace Law \n\n\n \nAngela E. Rae\nEmployer Counsel\nRae Christen Jeffries LLP \n\n\nWednesday\, April 17\, 2024Introductory remarks by co-chairs: 12:30 pm – 12:35 pm ET \nKeynote - 12:35 pm – 1:20 pm\n\n\n \nProf. Adelle Blackett\nChair\nEmployment Equity Act Review\nTask Force \nProfessor\nCanada Research Chair in Transnational Labour Law\nMcGill University \n\n\nBreak: 1:20 pm – 1:30 pm ET \nPanel 1 - In Pursuit of Equity: Experts examine key cases and legislative developments - 1:30 pm – 2:45 pmIn Pursuit of Equity: Experts examine key cases and legislative developments \n\n\n \nArchana Mathew\nMediator\, Arbitrator\nArchana Mathew – Mediation & Arbitration \n\n\n \nMelissa Mustafa\nEmployer Counsel\nLakhani Campea LLP \n\n\n \nKaren Segal\nUnion Counsel\nAllevato Quail & Roy \n\n\nIn this session\, panelists will examine recent noteworthy cases and legislative developments relating to gender equity in the workplace. Speakers will discuss the latest cases addressing topics such as: \n\nKey trends in discipline and damages for sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of sex\, gender\, and family status;\nThe impact of stereotypes and unconscious bias and the role of intersectionality in evaluating and responding to allegations of discrimination and harassment;\n“Poisoned work environments”\, including the impact of “microaggressions” and other subtle forms of discrimination;\nOff-duty conduct\, including determining when conduct that is harassing or discriminatory will be considered sufficiently connected with the workplace to be actionable;\nKey principles and best practices in investigating discrimination and harassment claims;\nBest practices in respecting gender diversity at work;\nThe use of anti-strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) proceedings to protect human rights-related speech; and\nPay equity update.\n\nThe panel will also address recent federal and provincial legislative initiatives\, including: \n\nThe federal Employment Equity Act Review Task Force Report and related changes to the Act;\nRecent federal regulations improving the availability of menstrual products in the workplace; and\nProposed and pending provincial legislative initiatives aimed at promoting pay transparency.\n\nFinal selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most newsworthy developments.Break: 2:45 pm – 2:55 pm ET \nPanel 2 - Silenced or Settled? The implications of using non-disclosure agreements to settle harassment and other workplace disputes - 2:55 pm – 3:45 pm\nSilenced or Settled? The implications of using non-disclosure agreements to settle harassment and other workplace disputes \n\n\n \nJillian Humphreys\nLawyer and Workplace Investigator\nSouthern Butler Price LLP \n\n\n \nJennifer Khor\nSupervising Lawyer & Project Manager\nSexual Harassment Advice\, Response\, and Prevention for Workplaces\nSHARP Workplaces\nStand Informed legal advice services \n\n\n \nAsha Rampersad\nEmployer Counsel\, Workplace Investigator & Trainer\nTurnpenney Milne LLP \n\n\n \nMatt Yun\nLegal & Legislative Representative\nCanadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) \n\n\nNon-disclosure agreements\, colloquially referred to as “NDAs”\, are legal contracts that ensure confidentiality between signatories. While NDAs are common practice in workplace settlements\, there is growing concern about the potential of NDAs to silence the victims of discrimination and harassment while shielding employers from reputational damage. The Canadian Bar Association has passed a resolution against the misuse of NDAs. In this session\, a panel of experts will address the following: \n\nHow are NDAs currently being used in workplace disputes?\nWhat are the legal components of NDAs? What information can be covered by an NDA?\nWhat are the negative ramifications of using NDAs in workplace disputes? What are the potential benefits? How do NDAs impact the victims of harassment and/or violence?\nWhat circumstances may render an NDA unenforceable?\nWhat happens if an employee or former employee violates an NDA? How have courts and/or arbitrators treated breaches of NDAs?\nWhat legislative/regulatory changes have been passed respecting the use of NDAs in workplace disputes? What changes are forthcoming?\n\nBreak: 3:45 pm – 3:50 pm ET \nPanel 3 - Building Belonging at Work: Achieving genuine inclusion of gender diversity - 3:50 pm – 4:55 pm\nBuilding Belonging at Work: Achieving genuine inclusion of gender diversity \n\n\n \nFae Johnstone\nExecutive DirectorWisdom2Action \n\n\n \nEarl Moloney\nLabour Relations OfficerHealth Sciences Association of BC \n\n\n \nKai Scott\nPresidentTransFocus Consulting \n\n\n \nLisa Stam\nEmployer CounselSpringLaw \n\n\n \nEvan Vipond\nLead ConsultantVipond Consulting \n\n\nGenuine inclusion of transgender and gender-diverse individuals in the workplace is a critical component of providing a safe and healthy work environment. In this session\, expert panelists will explain the ways in which employers\, unions\, and employees can collaborate to create an inclusive workplace for all\, addressing the following: \n\nWhat is gender identity and gender expression? What does it mean to be transgender or gender-diverse?\nWhat are the benefits of diversity and inclusion in the workplace? What are the advantages of a diversity and inclusion team and how can an employer foster the team’s success?\nWhat are examples of common mistakes made by employers when attempting to achieve inclusion of transgender and gender-diverse individuals?\nHow can an employer design\, implement and monitor genuine and effective inclusive policies for transgender and gender-diverse individuals? Who should have a role in developing and/or monitoring inclusive workplace policies?\nHow can employers and unions best incorporate inclusive hiring practices?\nWhat steps must an employer take when discrimination or harassment concerns arise relating to the mistreatment of a transgender or gender-diverse employee? Why are investigations so critical to the protection of transgender or gender-diverse employees? What role does the union and employee have in the complaint process\, investigation process\, and outcomes of the investigation?\nWhen may a transgender or gender-diverse employee require accommodation? When do employers have a duty to accommodate? What role do the employer\, the union and the employee play in the accommodation process? How can employers and unions support transitioning employees?\nIn creating an inclusive workplace\, what role do organizational competency and raising awareness play in the workplace regarding gender identity and gender expression?\n\nClosing remarks by co-chairs: 4:55 pm – 5:00 pm ET \nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 3.45 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 3.45 substantive hours; 0 professionalism hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/gender-equity-virtual-conference/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/gevc-header-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20240403
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20240406
DTSTAMP:20260611T071619
CREATED:20231109T142501Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T125120Z
UID:11159-1712102400-1712361599@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Vancouver Human Rights and Accommodation Conference: Evaluating current practices\, exploring emerging trends
DESCRIPTION:Vancouver Human Rights and Accommodation ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nJennifer Devins\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP \n\n\n \nE. Murphy Fries\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\n \nRyan Goldvine\nMediator/Arbitrator\nGoldvine Dispute Resolution Services \nMember\nBC Employment Standards Tribunal \n\n\nDelta Hotels Vancouver Downtown Suites - Discounted Room\nGroup rates are now available with limited space availability: \n\n\n\nStart Date\nEnd Date\n\n\n04/02/2024\n04/06/2024\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\nSingle\nDouble\n\n\n$379.00\n$379.00\n\n\n\n  \nMethod of Reservation \nIndividual Reservations can be made by visiting the link below or calling directly at 1 (844) 254-5048. Callers must identify themselves as being with Lancaster House Publishing in order to qualify for the group rate. \nCut-Off Date \nReservations made by attendees must be received on or before Tuesday\, March 12\, 2024\, after which any reservations made will be based on a space-and rate-available basis. \nBook NowConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nAleem Bharmal\nLawyer\nBC Human Rights Clinic\nCommunity Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) \n\n\n \nValerie Dixon\nLegal Counsel – Labour\nEmployment and Human Rights\nCity of Vancouver \n\n\n \nJessica Fairbairn\nEmployer Counsel\nHarris & Company LLP \n\n\n \nKoml Kandola\nArbitrator/Mediator and lawyer \n\n\n \nShirin Kiamanesh\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\n \nEarl Moloney\nSenior Labour Relations Officer\nHealth Sciences Association of BC (HSABC) \n\n\nWednesday\, April 3\, 2024*Workshop sold separately from stand-alone conference. \nWorkshopBefore and After the Investigation: Preventing conflict\, restoring relationships\nWorkshop: Before and After the Investigation: Preventing conflict\, restoring relationships\n\n\n \nAnita Atwal\nLawyer\, Mediator and Workplace Investigator\nAnita Atwal Law \n\n\n \nCarolyn Janusz\nPrincipal lawyer\nGoodWin Law \n\n\n \nVictoria Merritt\nEmployer Counsel\nDentons \n\n\n \nShelina Neallani\nLawyer\, Mediator & Workplace Investigator\nSouthern Butler Price \n\n\nToxic work environments and workplace conflict are detrimental to employees’ wellbeing\, can hinder productivity\, lead to a high turnover rate\, and expose employers to potential liabilities. In this panel\, experts will examine how employers and unions can work together to foster healthy work environments through proactive strategies\, fair workplace investigations\, and effective conflict-resolution initiatives. Specifically\, panels will address the following questions: \n\nWhat measures can employers and unions implement to foster a safe and respectful workplace?\nHow can employers and unions craft effective workplace harassment policies? What key terms should be included? According to arbitrators\, what practices should be avoided?\nWhat steps should unions and employers take in response to employee allegations of a poisoned work environment and/or workplace conflict?\nIn what circumstances are employers legally obligated to conduct a workplace investigation? What do recent cases tell us about what constitutes a fair\, adequate\, and effective investigation? How can employers protect complainants and witnesses from reprisal?\nWhat is the role of the union in workplace investigations?\nWhen will an arbitrator award damages to employees who have experienced a poisoned work environment and/or inadequate investigation?\nWhat steps can employers and unions take to restore relationships in response to workplace conflict and/or allegations of a poisoned work environment?\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWorkshop Schedule\n\n\nBreakfast:\n8:00 am – 9:00 am PT\n\n\nWorkshop:\n9:00 am – 10:25 am PT\n\n\nMorning Break:\n10:25 am – 10:40 am PT\n\n\nWorkshop:\n10:40 am – 12:00 pm PT\n\n\nLunch:\n12:00 pm – 1:00 pm PT\n\n\nWorkshop:\n1:00 pm – 2:20 pm PT\n\n\nAfternoon Break:\n2:20 pm – 2:35 pm PT\n\n\nWorkshop:\n2:35 pm – 4:00 pm PT\n\n\n\n\nThursday\, April 4\, 2024Breakfast: 8:00 am – 9:00 am PT \nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 am – 9:10 am PT \nPanel 1 - Human Rights Highlights: The latest caselaw and legislative developments - 9:10 am – 10:40 am PT\n\n\n \nGuy Beaulieu\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nColin Edstrom\nEmployer Counsel\nPushor Mitchell LLP \n\n\n \nKevin Love\nLawyer\, Community Law Program\nCommunity Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) \n\n\n \nJennifer Kwok\nEmployer Counsel\nOverholt Law \n\n\n \nMary Thibodeau\nUnion Counsel\nMoore Edgar Lyster LLP \n\n\n \nElisabeth Finney\nUnion Counsel\nBlack Burke Mayor LLP\, dba Black Gropper \n\n\nIn this session\, panelists will examine recent noteworthy cases and legislative developments relating to human rights in the workplace. Speakers will discuss the latest cases addressing topics such as: \n\nabsenteeism and requests for medical information;\ncaste-based discrimination;\npoisoned workplaces and “zero tolerance” approaches to discrimination and harassment\,\ntrends in discipline and damages\,\nthe legality of biometric monitoring\,\nand the use of anti-strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) proceedings to protect human rights-related speech.\n\nThe panel will also address recent B.C. and federal legislative initiatives\, including: \n\nRecent B.C. Workers Compensation Act amendments;\nFederal legislation on forced labour.\n\nFinal selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most newsworthy developments.Break: 10:40 am – 10:55 am PT \nPanel 2 - Ties that Bind: Accommodating family status and caregiving obligations - 10:55 am – 12:10 pm PT\n\n\n \nWill Clements\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\n \nDavid Woolias\nEmployer Counsel\nHarris & Company LLP \n\n\n \nHeather Hoiness\nStaff Lawyer\nBC’s Office of the Human Rights Commissioner \n\n\nIn this interactive session\, expert panelists will address recent developments in the test for family status discrimination in British Columbia and engage audience members in exercises illustrating practical applications of the test\, better equipping employers and unions to navigate family status accommodation requests. Speakers will address questions including: \n\nWhat forms of caregiving fall under the protective umbrella of family status accommodation?\nWill a change in the employee’s family circumstances be sufficient to trigger the duty or is an employer-introduced change to the employee’s terms and conditions of employment required?\nHow can employers and unions distinguish preferences from substantial obligations? For example\, when will a request to work from home to provide caregiving to elderly parents or young children amount to a preference rather than an obligation? What about requests such as leaving work early to enable an employee to pick a child up from school rather than have that child take the bus?\nWhat constitutes a “serious interference” with a family obligation such that it will be found to constitute family status discrimination?\n\nNetworking Lunch: 12:10 pm – 1:30 pm PT \nFireside Chat - 1:30 pm – 2:00 pm PT\n\n\n \nEmily Ohler\nChair\nBC Human Rights Tribunal \n\n\nBreak: 2:00 pm – 2:15 pm PT \nPanel 3 - Beliefs and Boundaries: Reconciling employee free speech and employer concerns - 2:15 pm – 3:30 pm PT\n\n\n \nArvin Asadi\nLawyer and Workplace Investigator\nSouthern Butler Price \n\n\n \nKatie Comley\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP \n\n\n \nMenachem Freedman\nUnion Counsel\nHHBG Lawyers \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\nClosing Remarks: 3:30 pm – 3:40 pm PT \nFriday\, April 5\, 2024Breakfast: 8:00 am – 9:00 am PT \nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 am – 9:10 am PT \nPanel 4 - Putting Neurodiversity to Work: Effective strategies for recruitment\, accommodation\, and retention - 9:10 am – 10:25 am PT\n\n\n \nJulia Bell\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP \n\n\n \nSonya Sabet-Rasekh\nStaff Representative\, Advocacy Department\nB.C. General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\n \nJames Stewart\nProfessor\nPeter A. Allard School of Law\nUniversity of British Columbia \n\n\nOn a societal level\, there is increasing recognition that neurodivergence is a strength\, not a deficit\, and building inclusive\, neurodivergent workplaces makes a positive impact. In this panel\, experts will examine how employers can effectively recruit\, retain\, and accommodate neurodivergent employees\, and how unions can support their neurodivergent membership. Specifically\, the panel will address the following: \n\nHow can businesses benefit from hiring neurodivergent employees?\nWhat measures can employers put in place to effectively recruit neurodivergent employees? How can employers support/accommodate neurodivergent applicants throughout the recruitment process?\nConsidering the emphasis on self-identification in the neurodiverse community\, must employees who identify as neurodivergent provide evidence of a medical diagnosis to access initiatives designed to recruit diverse employees? How should employers respond to these disclosures when they occur?\nHow do common stereotypes hinder the inclusion and accommodation of neurodivergent employees in the workplace? What can be done to guard against these stereotypes?\nWhat should workplace parties know about specific conditions such as Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD)\, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD)\, and learning disabilities falling under the umbrella of neurodivergence? Do these conditions share any similarities? How might they affect an employee’s work performance?\nWhat are the signs an employee may be struggling with work performance or workplace relationships because of a neurological difference such as ASD or ADHD? When does the employer have a duty to inquire as to whether the employee in question requires accommodation?\nWhat are some examples of appropriate and effective accommodations for neurodivergent employees?\nWhat kind of medical information can employers request from employees seeking accommodation on the basis of neurodivergence? Can a detailed neuropsychological evaluation report be required? How often\, if ever\, should updated medical information be requested from a neurodivergent employee\, who\, by definition\, has a lifelong condition?\nWhat accommodations should unions provide to neurodivergent members accessing union services and using union processes?\n\nBreak: 10:25 am – 10:40 am PT \nPanel 5 - Investigating Investigations: Examining current practices and recent caselaw - 10:40 am – 11:55 am PT\n\n\n \nJonathan Chapnick\nMember\nBC Human Rights Tribunal \n\n\n \nKirsten Hume Scrimshaw\nEmployer Counsel\nAlly Workplace Law \n\n\n \nTina-Marie Bradford\nStaff Lawyer\, Advocacy Department\nBC General Employees Union (BCGEU) \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 ask 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\nLunch: 11:55 pm – 12:55 pm PT \nKeynote - Paddling Together: Navigating Indigenous Relations in the Workplace - 12:55 pm – 1:25 pm PT\n\n\n \nRhiannon Bennett\nCo-Founder\nHummingbirds Rising Consulting \n\n\nRhiannon Bennett\, from Hummingbirds Rising Consulting\, explores the metaphor of a canoe journey to illustrate the importance of collaboration and understanding in fostering positive relationships with Indigenous communities within organizational settings.\nThis engaging presentation emphasizes the need for HR and union leaders to navigate these relationships with cultural sensitivity\, mutual respect\, and a commitment to reconciliation for the benefit of all involved.Panel 6 - Is it Harassment or Not? An interactive panel with case studies and scenarios - 1:25 pm – 2:40 pm PT\n\n\n \nJacqueline Beltgens\nLawyer\, Workplace Investigator\, and Mediator\nJacqueline Beltgens Law \n\n\n \nKas Pavanantharajah\nUnion Counsel\nBlack Burke Mayor LLP\, dba Black Gropper \n\n\n \nJessica Thomson\nEmployer Counsel\nPulver Crawford Munroe LLP \n\n\nThe general definition of harassment in British Columbia is clear: it is “any inappropriate conduct or comment by a person towards a worker that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause the worker to be humiliated and insulted.” In many instances impugned conduct or comments will clearly meet this definition\, but in other cases debate may arise as to whether the alleged harasser ought reasonably to have known that certain comments or conduct would cause humiliation or offence. This session 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\nBreak: 2:40 pm – 2:55 pm PT \nPanel 7 - Truly Transformative? Recent B.C. and federal initiatives in employment equity - 2:55 pm – 4:00 pm PT\n\n\n \nAna Mohammed\nPrincipal\nARM Mediation and Consulting \n\n\n \nHasan Alam\nStaff Lawyer\nB.C. General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\n \nLou Poskitt\nEmployer Counsel\nCooperwilliams Truman & Ito LLP \n\n\nIn this session\, panelists will discuss two recent provincial and federal initiatives aimed at promoting workplace equity. Speakers will address the recent report of the federal Employment Equity Act Review Task Force\, exploring broader lessons learned for workplace parties\, and will examine the recent introduction of provincial pay transparency legislation as a targeted equity initiative. Questions to be addressed include: \n\nWhat changes did the Task Force recommend with respect to how employment equity groups are defined and described under the Employment Equity Act?\nHow can employers shift from a “top-down” approach to employment equity to a consultative process which involves unions and employees? What lessons can be learned from the Task Force’s recommendations regarding workplace employment equity committees?\nWhat problems did the Task Force identify with the concepts of “merit” or “fit” in recruiting and promoting employees? How might unconscious bias or systemic discrimination impact the assessment of an employee’s qualifications?\nHow can workplace parties ensure that the collection of employee data for equity-related initiatives is meaningful and appropriate? What common pitfalls have led to what the Task Force deems “superficial data collection”? How can employers and unions measure and evaluate progress toward workplace equity?\nHow is B.C.’s Pay Transparency Act expected to address these issues of data collection and discrimination in recruitment and promotion? What new obligations arise for workplace parties under the Act? Are there any mechanisms in place for its enforcement?\n\nClosing Remarks: 4:00 pm PT \nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/vancouver-human-rights-and-accommodation-conference-2024/
LOCATION:Simon Fraser University – Vancouver Campus\, 580 West Hastings Street\, Vancouver\, British Columbia\, V6B 1L6\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Human Rights & Accommodation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/van-hra-header-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20240306
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20240308
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20231109T142550Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240306T144219Z
UID:11269-1709683200-1709855999@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:National Pensions Conference 2024: Emerging trends in a changing world
DESCRIPTION:National Pensions ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nCynthia Crysler\nPensions Counsel\nCavalluzzo LLP \n\n\n \nMichael Wolpert\nPensions Counsel\nFasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nMary Kate Archibald\nActuary/Principal\nEckler Ltd. \n\n\n \nJames Harnum\nPensions Counsel\nKoskie Minsky LLP \n\n\n \nEvan Howard\nChief Legal and Regulatory Affairs Officer\nCAAT Pension Plan \n\n\n \nJonathan Marin\nPensions Counsel\nOsler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP \n\n\nWednesday\, March 6\, 2024Introductory remarks: 12:30 pm – 12:40 pm ET \nPanel 1 - Pension Projections: Experts review economic forecasts - 12:40 pm – 1:55 pm ET\n\n\n \nFaisal Siddiqi\nManaging Director\, Actuarial\nUniversity Pension Plan Ontario \n\n\n \nJosh Ingram\nActuary/Principal\nEckler Ltd. \n\n\n \nKelleher Lynch \nPensions Counsel\nMcCarthy Tétrault LLP \n\n\n \nJames Harnum\nPensions Counsel\nKoskie Minsky LLP \n\n\nMixed outlooks for inflation\, interest rates\, and economic growth have differing implications for the financial health of pension plans and their sponsoring employers in 2024. In this session\, leading experts explore the risks and opportunities associated with the current and predicted economic climate\, and address the following: \n\nWhat does the latest data indicate about the financial health of Canadian defined benefit pension plans?\nHow do the current economic conditions affect different types of pension plans (e.g. defined benefit vs. defined contribution; public sector vs. private sector) and their members? What are the implications of any divergence in these effects?\nWhat are the latest economic forecasts\, including the outlook for inflation\, interest rates\, unemployment\, and growth?\nHow would a sustained fall in inflation and/or interest rates affect pension plans and their members?\nWhat strategies can pension plan administrators take to manage pension plans and pension plan investments in an economic downturn? What role do administrators’ statutory and fiduciary obligations play in this regard?\nWhat implications do the current economic climate and related forecasts have for workplace parties negotiating retirement security plans? Are there pension structures that should be favoured or avoided?\nShould workplaces with pension plans already in place consider altering those arrangements in light of current economic data? Do pension plan administrators and sponsoring employers have an obligation to consult the union before making such changes? Is union consent required for these changes?\nWhat are governments and regulators doing to assist pension plans and their members in coping with current economic conditions? What more can be done?\n\nKeynote - Meeting the Challenges Facing Pension Incomes in Canada: An Introduction to Dynamic Pension Pools - 1:55 pm – 2:40 pm ET\n\n\n \nBonnie-Jeanne MacDonald\nDirector of Financial Security Research\nNational Institute on Aging\nToronto Metropolitan University\nResident Scholar\nEckler \n\n\nFinancial security in retirement is a growing concern for many Canadians\, with a recent National Institute on Ageing survey showing that 77% of older adults are worried about their financial well-being. With retirement expected to last several decades for many—combined with unpredictable financial markets and changing personal circumstances—older Canadians face a tremendous challenge in turning accumulated savings into income that will last the rest of their lives. An emerging solution\, called Dynamic Pension pools\, could give Canadians access to affordable retirement income for life. Join the lead author of the report as she discusses the challenges and the legislative successes they have made to make Dynamic Pensions a reality in Canada – the missing piece in our retirement income system.\nBreak: 2:40 pm – 2:55 pm ET \nPanel 2 - Keeping Current on Pensions: An update on key caselaw and legislative developments - 2:55 pm – 4:10 pm ET\n\n\n \nLaura Brownell\nStaff Representative – Pensions\nSociety of United Professionals \n\n\n \nLevel Chan\nPensions Counsel\nStewart McKelvey \n\n\n \nRoss Gascho\nPensions Counsel\nFasken \n\n\n \nAnthony Guindon\nPensions Counsel\nKoskie Minsky LLP \n\n\nThis panel explores significant court and tribunal decisions related to pensions. Topics to be addressed include plan amendments\, class action cases\, fiduciary duties\, negligence\, contribution rates\, pensionable earnings\, the obligations of successor employers\, and constitutional issues arising out of public sector pension plan reforms. The panel will also review recent legislative and regulatory developments including\, Bill C-228\, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act\, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act\, 1985 and provincial legislative developments. Experts will also explore draft guidelines released by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important legislative and regulatory developments. \nClosing remarks: 4:10 pm – 4:12 pm ET \nThursday\, March 7\, 2024Introductory remarks: 12:30 pm – 12:40 pm ET \nPanel 3 - Pensions with Principle: Experts take stock of emerging ESG considerations in investing and fiduciary duties - 12:40 pm – 1:55 pm ET\n\n\n \nRandy Bauslaugh\nPensions Counsel\nRandy Bauslaugh Professional Corporation \n\n\n \nMurray Gold\nPensions Counsel\nKoskie Minsky LLP \n\n\n \nMarie-Josée Privyk\nESG Advisor\nFinComm Services \n\n\nEnvironmental\, social\, and governance (ESG) considerations continue to engage investors\, and those charged with administering pension funds. This panel will address related issues including: \n\nTo what extent do common law fiduciary duties require pension plan administrators to factor ESG considerations into their investment-related decision making? Does this answer depend on plan terms or type of plan?\nDo pension plan administrators have any obligations to unions regarding their investment choices?\nIn what ways can unionized plan members have a say in how their pensions are invested? Can ESG considerations be addressed at the bargaining table?\nWhat do current legislative and regulatory requirements mandate regarding ESG disclosure across Canadian jurisdictions? What changes are in prospect?\nWhat level of familiarity should pension plan board members have regarding ESG-related issues?\n\nBreak: 1:55 pm – 2:10 pm ET \nKeynote - Innovating Pension Designs that Meet the Needs of Today’s Workforce - 2:10 pm – 2:55 pm ET\n\n\n \nDerek Dobson\nChief Executive Officer and Plan Manager\nCAAT Pension Plan \n\n\nWorkplace pension plans exist and evolve at the intersection of several dynamic forces: demographic changes\, business needs of employers\, behavioural economics of members\, labour trends\, investment markets\, workforce migration\, regulatory priorities\, and more. What is needed to design sustainable\, valuable pensions that provide the best outcome – lifetime retirement income security for all – under these complex conditions and interests? Innovation happens when bold ideas are turned into practical solutions. CAAT Pension Plan CEO and Plan Manager Derek Dobson will cover how innovating defined benefit pensions can provide sustainable value and meet the demands of a changing workplace. \nBreak: 2:55 pm – 3:00 pm ET \nPanel 4 - Changing Tides: Experts discuss trends and challenges in pension modernization - 3:00 pm – 4:15 pm ET\n\n\n \nElizabeth Boyd\nPensions Counsel\nBlake\, Cassels & Graydon LLP \n\n\n \nCheri Hearty\nSupervisor\, Worker Safety and Pension & Benefits Units\nOntario Public Sector Employees Union (OPSEU) \n\n\n \nBarbara Sanders\nAssociate Professor\nStatistics & Actuarial Science\nSimon Fraser University \n\n\n \nLaura Strachan\nDirector\, Pension & Group Benefits\nEckler Ltd. \n\n\nEven well-funded pension plans must adapt in the face of economic and demographic challenges\, as evolving conceptions of the meaning of retirement require a re-think of what constitutes retirement income adequacy. This panel will shed light on the hazards that lie ahead for the Canadian pension system and address the following: \n\nTo what extent do political factors\, notably the Alberta government’s proposal to establish its own public pension plan\, threaten the future sustainability of the CPP?\nHow are current pension structures changing to account for existing economic and sociopolitical realities? For example\, how are defined benefit plans insulating themselves against demographic and economic pressures? What new\, or previously less utilized\, pension models are growing in popularity in light of these pressures?\nWhat are governments doing to support enhanced retirement income security for the increasing proportion of the Canadian workforce that is not covered by a defined benefit pension plan?\nHow are views on the meaning of retirement changing\, and what does this mean for pensions and other sources of retirement income?\nDo pension plans remain an important factor in recruitment and retention? As many employees now work for multiple employers across the course of their careers\, are traditional employer-sponsored pension plans still viable and/or a desirable benefit?\nHow is pension plan administration changing to account for evolving family structures? What steps should employers and unions take to ensure that negotiated pension plans are not discriminatory?\nWorkers in the gig economy\, including those engaged in app-based service delivery\, are excluded from traditional retirement savings avenues such as workplace pension plans because of their employment status. What policy options could extend retirement security to this group?\nWhat role\, if any\, will artificial intelligence play in the administration of pension plans and pension funds?\n\nClosing remarks: 4:15 pm ET \nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for Continuing Professional Development 6.5 hours under Category A of the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association (HRPA).\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may count this program for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may count this program for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nCPD for Members of the Law Society of Ontario: 6.5 Substantive Hours; 0 Professionalism Hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/national-pensions-conference-2024-emerging-trends-in-a-changing-world/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/national-pensions-2024-banner-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Halifax:20240205T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Halifax:20240205T160000
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20231218T193845Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240201T155927Z
UID:11536-1707136200-1707148800@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Grievance Arbitration Fire Services Workshop: Current Trends\, Contested Issues
DESCRIPTION:Speakers\n\n \nSean McManus\nLabour Relations Counsel \n\n\n \nChris Albertyn\nArbitrator \n\n\n \nTom Roper K.C.\nLabour Relations Counsel \n\n\nMonday\, February 5\, 2024This session on grievance arbitration in the fire sector across Canada will be conducted by an experienced arbitrator together with leading union and management counsel. \nPanelists will explore recent decisions relating to current issues including the following: \n\nDischarge and discipline\nBenefits and benefit-related issues (prior authorization\, line of duty death\, reasonable and customary limits\, etc.)\nHuman rights and discrimination\nDisability and accommodation\nPrivacy and privacy-related issues (medical information)\nSick leave and other leaves of absence\nMinimum staffing\, 24-hour shift\, shift exchanges\, etc.\nAlcohol and drug addiction\nOff-duty conduct\nMandatory vaccination\n\nAttendees can expect to be updated on cases involving the principles of collective agreement interpretation\, including the following: \n\nContextual evidence of negotiating history\nEstoppel\nStatutory freeze issues\nThe requirements of good faith\nFairness and management rights\nRelevance of statute law\n\nThe emphasis will be on practical advice. Up-to-date materials will be provided with case summaries\, overviews and analyses prepared by Lancaster’s legal staff. \nWho should attend? The program is designed for: \n\nHR directors\, professionals and executives\nFire chiefs and deputy fire chiefs\nUnion officers\, representatives and advocates\nGrievance advisors and committee members\nLabour lawyers/consultants\nArbitrators\, mediators and adjudicators\n\nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for Continuing Professional Development 3.5 hours under Category A of the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association (HRPA).\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nCPD for Members of the Law Society of Ontario: 3.5 Substantive Hours; 0 Professionalism Hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may count this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may count this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/grievance-arbitration-fire-services-workshop-current-trends-contested-issues/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference,Fire Services
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/ff-header-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Halifax:20240131T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Halifax:20240131T160000
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20231218T193507Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240118T142648Z
UID:11529-1706704200-1706716800@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Interest Arbitration Fire Services Workshop: Current Issues\, Proven Practices
DESCRIPTION:Speakers\n\n \nTom Roper K.C.\nLabour Relations Counsel \n\n\n \nChris Albertyn\nArbitrator \n\n\n \nJeffrey Sack K.C.\nLabour Relations Counsel \n\n\nWednesday\, January 31\, 2024Seasoned experts will address key issues and trends in interest arbitration in the fire sector\, as reflected in recent arbitration awards across Canada. \nAttendees can expect to learn principles and practices relating to the following: \n\nSelecting an arbitrator\nPreparing for mediation meetings and arbitration hearings\nPresenting briefs and documents at arbitration\nExamining alternative formats including conventional arbitration\, med-arb\, arb-med\, final offer selection\, and first contract arbitration\nCriteria and how they are applied by arbitrators including replication/comparability\, demonstrated need and total compensation\nThe treatment of substantive issues\, such as wage determination\, impact of inflation\, staffing standards\, contracting out\, appropriate benefit levels\, etc.\nThe treatment of process issues\, including ground rules\, package bargaining\, admissibility of negotiating exchanges\, propriety of late demands\, estoppel\, arbitrability of bargaining unit exclusions\, impact of post-hearing settlements\, effect of pattern-setting settlements and awards\, status of unratified settlements\nEffective remedies\, including interim awards\, retroactive decisions\, referral for further negotiation\, final orders\, enforcement and judicial review\n\nThe emphasis will be on practical advice. Up-to-date materials will be provided with case summaries\, overviews and analyses prepared by Lancaster’s legal staff. \nWho should attend? The program is designed for: \n\nHR directors\, professionals and executives\nFire chiefs and deputy fire chiefs\nUnion officers\, representatives\, advocates\nUnion and management negotiators and negotiating committee members\nLabour lawyers/consultants\nArbitrators\, mediators and adjudicators\n\nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for Continuing Professional Development 3.5 hours under Category A of the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association (HRPA).\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nCPD for Members of the Law Society of Ontario: 3.5 Substantive Hours; 0 Professionalism Hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may count this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may count this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/interest-arbitration-fire-services-workshop-current-issues-proven-practices/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference,Fire Services
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/ff-header-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231204
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231207
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20230706T191603Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T174332Z
UID:8968-1701648000-1701907199@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Toronto Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference & Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference
DESCRIPTION:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nMichael Sherrard\nEmployer Counsel\nSherrard Kuzz LLP \n\n\n \nNini Jones\nUnion Counsel\nJones Pearce LLP \n\n\nHotel X Toronto - Group Rates\nLancaster House has reserved a block of rooms at Hotel X for this conference event. The stay dates are between December 3rd to December 7th 2023.\nPlease call Hotel X at 1-647-943-9244\, or contact via email at Stay@hotelxtoronto.com to check on the availability and group rates. \nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nCasey Dockendorff\nEmployer Counsel\nFilion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP \n\n\n \nAndrew Hall\nConsultant\nHall Labour Relations Services Professional Corporation \n\n\n \nMatthew Hrycyna\nGrievance Officer\nOntario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU) \n\n\n \nGavin Leeb\nGeneral Counsel\nUniversity of Toronto Faculty Association \n\n\nLabour Arbitration and Policy ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nMarcia Barry\nLegal Counsel\nOntario English Catholic Teachers’ Association \n\n\n \nEdith Bramwell\nChairperson \nFederal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board \n\n\n \nDaniel Wong\nEmployer Counsel\nWeirFoulds LLP \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nShiran Brener\nCounsel\nOntario Treasury Board Secretariat \n\n\n \nSarah Crossley\nEmployer Counsel\nFilion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP \n\n\n \nRon Franklin\nUnion Counsel\nFranklin Law \n\n\n \nArchana Mathew\nIntern\, Arbitrator Development Program \n(Formerly Grievance Officer\, OPSEU) \n\n\n \nMarilyn Nairn\nArbitrator \n\n\nMonday\, December 4\, 2023Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector ConferenceBreakfast: 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.\nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m.\nPanel 1 - Checking the Forecast: Experts examine the economic and fiscal climate for bargaining in Ontario - 9:10 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.\n\n\n \nRobert Kavcic \nSenior Economist and Director of Economics\nBMO \n\n\n \nAngella MacEwen\nSenior Economist\nCUPE \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine the economic and fiscal forecast for Ontario and Canada in 2024\, focusing on the implications for collective bargaining. Specifically\, the panel will address: \n\nWhat short- and long-term economic and fiscal trends are experts predicting in 2024 in Ontario and in Canada? How does the outlook in Ontario compare to other provinces and the United States?\nHow should parties address rising costs of living/inflation when negotiating wage increases? Beyond general wage increases\, what wage adjustment mechanisms may be employed? Are longer-term wage adjustments such as periodic cost of living adjustments likely to gain traction?\nHow does the current status of the Ontario labour market compare with the federal labour market? Were more jobs gained or lost in 2023? What is the outlook for 2024?\nHow can parties tackle staffing and retention challenges during negotiations? Based on the labour market outlook\, is there greater pressure to increase wages\, or make other concessions\, to attract and retain workers?\nWill the recent increases in the federal minimum wage and the Ontario minimum wage affect bargaining\, especially negotiations pertaining to lower-wage workers?\nWhat measures are governments likely to prioritize in 2024 provincial and federal budgets to ensure economic growth and prosperity? How will these measures affect bargaining?\n\nMorning break: 10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.\nPanel 2 - Bargaining Bulletins: Update on major caselaw and legislation - 10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.\n\n\n \nChristopher Pigott\nEmployer Counsel\nFasken Martineau \n\n\n \nElizabeth Keenan\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews Dinsdale \n\n\n \nKirsty Niglas-Collins\nUnion Counsel\nUnified LLP \n\n\n \nAleisha Stevens\nUnion Counsel\nCaleyWray \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine recent cases and legislative developments with implications for collective bargaining. Panelists will address the latest decisions on government intervention in collective bargaining\, cases illustrating key principles of collective agreement interpretation\, noteworthy interest arbitration awards\, and recent labour board rulings. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most newsworthy developments. \nLunch: 12:00 p.m. – 12:50 a.m.\nKeynote Speaker – Bots at the Bargaining Table: What is the future for workers? - 12:50 p.m. – 1:15 p.m.\nBots at the Bargaining Table: What is The Future For Workers?\n\n\n \nArmine Yalnizyan\nEconomist \n\n\nArtificial Intelligence has captured the headlines\, triggering both optimism and anxiety in both workers and management. But how could the public sector be impacted by these trends in technology? This keynote address\, delivered by Canada’s leading economic thinker on the future of work\, will provide a whirlwind tour through the issues you will be dealing with on both sides of the bargaining table during your next round of negotiations. \nPanel 3 - Labour Law Lightning Round: Flash focus on real-life contract provisions and issues - 1:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.\n\n\n \nSundeep Gokhale\nEmployer Counsel\nSherrard Kuzz \n\n\n \nCheryl Wiles Pooran\nEmployer Counsel\nPooranLaw \n\n\n \nMary Claire Bass\nEmployer Counsel\nBass & Associates \n\n\n \nNicole Gauthier\nExecutive Officer and Chief Negotiator\nOSSTF Toronto \n\n\n \nKimiko Inouye\nDirector of Collective Bargaining at the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations \n\n\n \nEmily Home\nUnion Counsel\nUrsel Phillips Fellows Hopkinson LLP \n\n\nIn this session\, panelists will highlight real-life collective agreement clauses recently negotiated to address current and pressing workplace issues. Topics covered in this panel will be finalized in the weeks prior to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest collective agreement language and the most relevant workplace issues. However\, topics currently under consideration include emerging changes to leave provisions; reconciliation in the workplace; privacy\, monitoring and surveillance; emergency-related procedures (relating to climate change/pandemics); and work-life balance and remote work.Afternoon break: 2:30 p.m. – 2:45 a.m.\nPanel 4 - Managing the Message: Expert guidance on communications\, misinformation\, and social media during bargaining - 2:45 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.\n\n\n \nShane Gonsalves\nManaging Director\, Government & Public Affairs\nOntario Public School Boards’ Association \n\n\n \nCraig Lawrence\nEmployer Counsel\nDentons \n\n\n \nLauren Pearce\nUnion Counsel\nJones Pearce \n\n\n \nShannon Devine\nDepartment Head\, Communications and Political Action\nUSW \n\n\nPresenting messages effectively\, accurately\, and lawfully is critical to successful negotiations. In this session\, panelists will discuss strategies for employers and unions seeking to manage communications before\, during\, and after collective bargaining. Specifically\, the panel will address: \n\nWhat key information should be communicated to employees or members during bargaining? How should these communications be framed?\nWhat types of communications with employees are permissible under the Ontario Labour Relations Actduring bargaining and what types of practices may be in violation of the Act?\nHow can employers and unions ensure that they get the information needed from each other and from employees in order to determine their bargaining positions?\nHow can employers and unions communicate effectively with one another during bargaining? What are best practices in presenting proposals\, responding to counterproposals\, and bridging an impasse?\nWhat adjustments\, if any\, should bargaining teams make to prepare effectively for communicating proposals and negotiating in a virtual or hybrid environment?\nHas there been an increase in recent years in rejected tentative agreements? Are there communication practices that may help avoid this outcome?\nWhat limits exist\, if any\, on communications with the media during collective bargaining? How should employers and unions respond to unintentional information “leaks”?\nWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of social media during bargaining when organizing employees\, assessing bargaining realities\, and taking into account privacy and confidentiality concerns?\nHow can parties manage misinformation in an increasingly digital world and evaluate the accuracy of information surrounding negotiations?\n\nBora Laskin Award DinnerCocktail reception: 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.\nDinner: 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.\nTuesday\, December 5\, 2023Labour Arbitration and Policy ConferenceBreakfast: 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.\nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m.\nPanel 1 - Notable and Newsworthy: Experts address key cases and legislative developments - 9:10 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.\n\n\n \nPaul Meier\nCounsel\nOntario Treasury Board Secretariat \n\n\n \nErin Porter\nEmployer Counsel\nFasken \n\n\n \nChris Dassios\nGeneral Counsel\nPower Workers’ Union \n\n\n \nJorge Hurtado\nUnion Counsel\nMorrison Watts \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will highlight recent and noteworthy cases on significant workplace issues\, such as privacy\, off-duty conduct\, discipline\, and accommodation\, as well as cases addressing procedural aspects of the arbitral process. Panelists will also discuss recent provincial and federal legislative amendments. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments.Break: 10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.\nPanel 2 - Potholes on the Road to Justice: Addressing delay\, abuse of process\, and undue legalization in arbitration - 10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.\n\n\n \nJohn McNamee\nArbitrator \n\n\n \nAmanda Hunter\nEmployer Counsel\nHunter Liberatore Law LLP \n\n\n \nMichael Hancock\nGeneral Counsel\nUFCW 1006a \n\n\nArbitration procedures have evolved significantly in recent years. Parties and practitioners have raised concerns about judicialization\, the timeliness of the process\, difficulties in selecting arbitrators\, and the ability to address abuse of process effectively. In this session\, experts will address the following: \n\nWhat common bottlenecks do parties encounter in the arbitral process? What can be done to eliminate unnecessary delays?\nDoes the growing legalism of arbitration undermine its unique advantages\, or is it necessary to ensure procedural protections for parties?\nWhat options exist outside of the conventional arbitration process? In what circumstances should parties consider these alternatives?\nCan parties reduce arbitration timelines by using virtual or hybrid formats? Is there room to automate arbitration processes by using artificial intelligence?\nWhat can be done to ensure the availability of a sufficient pool of arbitrators?\nHow are new arbitrators trained and selected? How can parties be encouraged to select newer and more diverse arbitrators?\n\nLunch: 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.\nPanel 3 - Ask an Arbitrator: Arbitrators weigh in on questions about AI and privacy - 1:00 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.\n\n\n \nLisa Goodfellow\nEmployer Counsel\nMiller Thompson \n\n\n \nJerry Raso\nLegal Counsel\nOntario English Catholic Teachers’ Association \n\n\n \nKevin Banks\nArbitrator \n\n\nGiven the lack of Canadian arbitration decisions on the use of 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 in Ontario. 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• What 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)?\n• Can employers rely on management rights to justify the use of AI to evaluate employee performance and manage employees?\n• What arguments for and against the use of algorithmic management would Ontario arbitrators find most compelling?\n• What legal concerns are raised when an employer uses AI to assess candidates’ suitability for positions?\n• What privacy concerns are raised by using AI to evaluate job applicants based on their internet activity? \nBreak: 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.\nPanel 4 - Discrimination and Harassment: Experts examine key cases\, evolving arbitral perspectives\, evidentiary considerations\, and more - 2:30 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.\n\n\n \nYola Grant\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nKathryn Bird\nEmployer Counsel\nOgletree Deakins \n\n\n \nJane Mulkewich\nLegal Director\nUFCW Local 175 \n\n\nThis panel will explore evolving arbitral perspectives with respect to discrimination and harassment and examine systemic barriers in grievance and arbitration processes. Specifically\, panelists will discuss: \n\nWhat do recent decisions suggest about how arbitral approaches are evolving with respect to discrimination and harassment claims? Are damage awards increasing? Is there a greater willingness to impose discipline?\nHow does systemic discrimination influence decisions about how grievances are handled\, including which should proceed to arbitration?\nHow have arbitrators applied the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Northern Regional Health Authority v. Horrocks when determining whether they have jurisdiction to hear a discrimination or harassment grievance?\nWhat evidence must be presented at arbitration to establish discrimination and harassment claims? What are best practices when presenting this evidence? When is it necessary or appropriate to present expert evidence – for example\, on unconscious or implicit biases?\nShould parties use non-disclosure agreements or clauses when settling discrimination- or harassment-related grievances? Is legislative prohibition of NDAs a likely prospect?\nWhat policy updates should employers and unions implement to address discrimination and harassment claims and ensure that such grievances are not improperly prevented from reaching arbitration?\n\nConference ends: 3:50 p.m.\nWednesday\, December 6\, 2023*Workshop sold separately from conference. \nBargaining In The Broader Public Sector Conference: WorkshopInterest Arbitration: Current Issues\, Proven Practices\n\n\n \nAndrew Hall\nConsultant\nHall Labour Relations Services Professional Corporation \n\n\n \nNorman Jesin\nArbitrator \n\n\n \nJeffrey Sack\nLabour Relations Counsel \n\n\nThis interactive session on interest arbitration will be conducted by an experienced arbitrator\, together with seasoned union and management nominees. Participants will explore the state of the art in various aspects of interest arbitration\, including research and preparation\, case presentation\, process issues\, substantive law\, and tactics and strategies. \nAttendees can expect to learn principles and practices relating to: \n\nSelection of an arbitrator;\nPreparation for mediation meetings and arbitration hearings;\nPresentation of briefs and documents at arbitration;\nAlternative formats including conventional arbitration\, med-arb\, arb-med\, and first contract arbitration;\nCriteria applied by arbitrators\, including replication/comparability\, demonstrated need\, and total compensation;\nProcess issues\, including standard ground rules\, package bargaining\, admissibility of exchanges during negotiations\, propriety of late demands\, estoppel\, arbitrability of proposed exclusions\, impact of post-hearing settlements\, and effect of pattern-setting awards;\nSubstantive topics\, such as wage determination\, impact of inflation\, staffing\, contracting out\, appropriate benefit levels\, etc.;\nEffective remedies\, including interim awards\, retroactive decisions\, referral to further negotiation\, final orders.\n\nThe emphasis in the workshop will be on interactive learning\, practical advice\, and role-playing. At the same time\, materials will be provided that reflect up-to-date arbitration caselaw. \nCPDBargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference CPD\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 5.5 substantive hours; 0 professionalism hours.\n\n\n\nLabour Arbitration and Policy Conference CPD\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 5 substantive hours; 0 professionalism hours.\n\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\n\n \n\nThe 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.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting The Post-Conference Workshops for 5.5 substantive hours; 0 professionalism hours\, each.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/toronto-labour-arbitration-and-policy-conference/
LOCATION:Beanfield Centre\, 105 Princes' Blvd\, Toronto\, Ontario\, M6K 3C3\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference,Conference,Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/toronto-header-3.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231127
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231130
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20230706T191534Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T174430Z
UID:9001-1701043200-1701302399@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Vancouver Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference & Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference
DESCRIPTION:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nMeena Brisard\nSecretary – Business Manager\nHospital Employees’ Union (HEU) \n\n\n \nJames Suderman\nExecutive Director\, Negotiations and Member Services\nHealth Employers Association of BC (HEABC) \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nRenzo Del Negro\nDirector of Human Resources\nCity of Coquitlam \n\n\n \nRebecca Maurer\nChief Executive Officer\nPost Secondary Employers’ Association (PSEA) \n\n\n \nStarleigh Grass\nAssistant Director\, Field Services Division\nBritish Columbia Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) \n\n\n \nDouglas Dykens\nExecutive Director of Field Services and Negotiations\nBC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\nLabour Arbitration and Policy ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nTina-Marie Bradford\nSenior Litigator\, Advocacy Department\nBC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\n \nClayton Jones\nEmployer Counsel\nFasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP \n\n\n \nGabriel Somjen\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nRyan Copeland\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP \n\n\n \nPatricia Deol\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\n \nJennifer Glougie\nChair\nBritish Columbia Labour Relations Board \n\n\n \nJay Sharun\nChief Executive Officer\nNational Collective Bargaining Institute \n\n\n \nBrittany (Britt) Skinner\nDirector\nBC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\nMonday\, November 27\, 2023Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector ConferenceBreakfast: 8:00 am – 9:00 am PT \nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 am – 9:10 am PT \nPanel 1 - Checking the Forecast: Experts examine the economic and fiscal climate for bargaining in B.C. - 9:10 am – 10:30 am PT\nChecking the Forecast: Experts examine the economic and fiscal climate for bargaining in B.C.\n\n\n \nIglika Ivanova\nSenior Economist and Public Interest Researcher\nCanadian Centre for Policy Alternatives \n\n\n \nPaul Todd\nSenior Director\, Labour Relations\nHealth Employers Association of BC (HEABC) \n\n\n \nRichard Tones\nDirector of Negotiations\nBC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\n \nDavid Williams\nVice President of Policy\nBusiness Council of British Columbia \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine the economic and fiscal forecast for B.C. and Canada in 2024\, focusing on the implications for collective bargaining. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat short- and long-term economic and fiscal trends are experts predicting in 2024 in B.C. and in Canada? How does the outlook in B.C. compare to other provinces and the United States?\nHow should parties address rising costs of living when negotiating wage increases? Beyond general wage increases\, what wage adjustment mechanisms may be employed? Are longer-term wage adjustments such as periodic cost of living adjustments likely to gain traction?\nHow does the current status of the B.C. labour market compare with the federal labour market? Were more jobs gained or lost in 2023? What is the outlook for 2024?\nHow can parties tackle staffing and retention challenges during negotiations? Based on the labour market outlook\, is there greater pressure to increase wages to attract and retain workers?\nWill the recent increases in the federal minimum wage and the B.C. minimum wage affect bargaining\, especially bargaining involving lower-wage workers?\nWhat measures are governments likely to prioritize in provincial and federal budgets to ensure economic growth and prosperity? How will these measures affect bargaining?\n\nMorning break: 10:30 am – 10:45 am PT \nPanel 2 - Bots at the Bargaining Table: Addressing artificial intelligence in negotiations - 10:45 am – 12:00 pm PT\nBots at the Bargaining Table: Addressing artificial intelligence in negotiations\n\n\n \nWendy Wong\nProfessor and Principal’s Research Chair\nUniversity of British Columbia \n\n\n \nErin Cutler\nSenior Legal Director and General Counsel\nHealth Employers Association of BC (HEABC) \n\n\n \nSteven Rogers\nUnion Counsel\nVictory Square Law Office LLP \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 recent Writers’ Guild strike and the SAG AFTRA strike 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 discuss the potential impact of AI on work in the broader public sector and offer their thoughts on how the impact should be addressed at the bargaining table. \n\nWhat aspects of work in the broader public sector are most likely to be affected by AI? Is employee privacy the primary concern? Replacement of workers? Work intensification?\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?\nAre concerns about AI displacing workers adequately addressed by “adjustment plans” required by the B.C. Labour Relations Code or by standard “technological change” provisions?\nHow should collective agreements address concerns about work intensification related to AI? Would standard “workload provisions” help? What about psychological health and safety provisions?\nHow should employers and unions address the potential use of 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 under collective agreements?\n\nLunch: 12:00 pm – 12:50 pm PT \nPanel 3 - Labour Law Lightning Round: Flash focus on real-life contract provisions and issues - 12:50 pm – 2:20 pm PT\nLabour Law Lightning Round: Flash focus on real-life contract provisions and issues\n\n\n \nStarleigh Grass\nAssistant Director\, Field Services Division\nBritish Columbia Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) \n\n\n \nEric Ito\nEmployer Counsel\nCooperwilliams Truman LLP \n\n\n \nWilliam Skinner\nStrategic Negotiations Lead\nHealth Employers Association BC (HEABC) \n\n\n \nJadine (Jay) Lannon\nUnion Counsel\nForte Law \n\n\n \nStefanie Quelch\nLegal Counsel\nBritish Columbia Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) \n\n\n \nJeanne Meyers\nGeneral Counsel and Executive Director of Legal Services and Labour Relations\nHealth Sciences Association of British Columbia (HSABC) \nLead Negotiator\nHealth Sciences Professionals Bargaining Association \nUnion Counsel\nAllevato Quail Roy \n\n\nIn this session\, panelists will highlight real-life collective agreement language recently negotiated to address current and pressing workplace issues. Topics covered in this panel will be finalized in the weeks prior to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest collective agreement language and the most relevant workplace issues. However\, topics currently under consideration include emerging changes to leave provisions; reconciliation in the workplace; privacy\, monitoring and surveillance; emergency-related procedures (relating to climate change/pandemics); and remote work. \nAfternoon break: 2:20 pm – 2:35 pm PT \nPanel 4 - Managing the Message: Expert guidance on communications\, misinformation\, and social media during bargaining - 2:35 pm – 3:50 pm PT\nManaging the Message: Expert guidance on communications\, misinformation\, and social media during bargaining\n\n\n \nKindrée Draper\nDirector\, Corporate Relations\nPublic Sector Employers’ Council (PSEC) Secretariat \n\n\n \nCaelie Frampton\nDirector of Communications\nHospital Employees’ Union (HEU) \n\n\n \nLynsey Gaudin\nEmployer Counsel\nMLT Aikins \n\n\n \nWill Clements\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\nCrafting and presenting messages effectively\, accurately\, and lawfully is critical to successful negotiations. In this session\, panelists will discuss strategies for employers and unions seeking to manage communications before\, during\, and after collective bargaining. Specifically\, the panel will address: \n\nWhat key information should be communicated to employees or members during bargaining? How should these communications be framed?\nWhat types of communications with employees are permissible under the B.C. Labour Relations Codeduring bargaining and what types of practices may be in violation of the Code?\nHow can employers and unions ensure that they get the information needed from each other and from employees in order to determine their bargaining positions?\nHow can employers and unions communicate effectively with one another during bargaining? What are best practices in presenting proposals\, responding to counterproposals\, and bridging an impasse?\nWhat adjustments\, if any\, should bargaining teams make to prepare effectively for communicating proposals and negotiating in a virtual or hybrid environment?\nHas there been an increase in recent years in rejected tentative agreements? Are there communication practices that may help avoid this outcome?\nWhat limits exist\, if any\, on communications with the media during collective bargaining? How should employers and unions respond to unintentional information “leaks”?\nWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of social media during bargaining when organizing employees\, assessing bargaining realities\, and taking into account privacy and confidentiality concerns?\nHow can parties manage misinformation in an increasingly digital world and evaluate the accuracy of information surrounding negotiations?\n\nNetworking reception: 4:00 pm – 5:00 pm PT \nConference ends: 5:00 pm PT \nTuesday\, November 28\, 2023Labour Arbitration and Policy ConferenceBreakfast: 8:00 am – 9:00 am PT \nIntroductory remarks: 9:00 am – 9:10 am PT \nPanel 1 - Notable and Newsworthy: Experts address key cases and legislative developments - 9:10 am – 10:40 am PT\nNotable and Newsworthy: Experts address key cases and legislative developments\n\n\n \nDanny Bernstein\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP \n\n\n \nJitesh Mistry\nLabour Arbitrator/Mediator\nMistry ADR \n\n\n \nSara Malkin\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews Dinsdale & Clarke LLP \n\n\n \nJeff Sanders\nUnion Counsel\nVictory Square Law Office LLP\n\n\n \nKirby Smith\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will discuss recent caselaw\, addressing topics such as surveillance and monitoring\, off-duty conduct\, sick leave and vaccination policies\, discrimination and accommodation\, and significant remedial awards. The panel will also discuss recent noteworthy legislative amendments. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \nMorning break: 10:40 am – 11:00 am PT \nPanel 2 - Digital Dignity: Protecting privacy in an era of workplace surveillance - 11:00 am – 12:15 pm PT\nDigital Dignity: Protecting privacy in an era of workplace surveillance\n\n\n \nStefanie Ratjen\nStaff Representative\nBC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) \n\n\n \nMarino Sveinson\nEmployer Counsel\nPulver Crawford Munroe \n\n\n \noline Twiss\nDeputy Commissioner and Deputy Registrar\nOffice of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) BC \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine the use of emerging technologies in the workplace and the boundaries of privacy rights in an increasingly digital world. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nHave arbitral approaches evolved in recent years when it comes to balancing employee privacy rights with an employer’s interest in ensuring productivity\, safety\, and compliance? How have arbitrators treated the use of emerging technologies such as biometric scanning\, GPS tracking\, and enhanced audio and video surveillance systems?\nWhat lessons can be learned from these decisions for monitoring and surveilling employees working from home? Can employers implement policies and practices that allow for “always on” webcam policies\, keystroke monitoring software\, and other technological means of closely tracking employees’ behaviour? Is a reasonable suspicion of “time theft” first required?\nHas there been a change in terms of what constitutes a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in information saved to or accessed from work devices? How is the analysis impacted where an employee is using their work device for personal matters or vice versa?\nIs it permissible for employers or employees to record workplace interactions? With most parties now having readily available cellphones capable of recording audio and video\, has this practice become more acceptable?\nWhat off-duty privacy rights and protections do employees enjoy\, if any? Do employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy in information shared to forums such as Facebook\, Instagram\, etc.\, where the information is accessible online but available only to users selected by the employee?\nHow do the privacy rights of job applicants differ from the rights of existing employees? Under current laws\, would an employer be permitted to use software to conduct a personality profile of job applicants based on their internet activity?\n\nLunch: 12:15 pm – 1:15 pm PT \nPanel 3 - Potholes on the Road to Justice: Addressing delay\, abuse of process\, and undue legalization in arbitration - 1:15 pm – 2:30 pm PT\nPotholes on the Road to Justice: Addressing delay\, abuse of process\, and undue legalization in arbitration\n\n\n \nJessica Gregory\nArbitrator\, Mediator and Investigator \n\n\n \nRobyn Trask\nGeneral Counsel\nBC Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) \n\n\n \nJennifer Wiegele\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews\, Dinsdale & Clark LLP \n\n\nArbitration procedures have evolved significantly in recent years. Parties and practitioners have raised concerns about judicialization\, the timeliness of the process\, difficulties in selecting arbitrators\, and the ability to address abuse of process effectively. In this session\, experts will address the following: \n\nWhat common bottlenecks do parties encounter in the arbitral process? How can labour practitioners eliminate unnecessary delays?\nDoes the growing legalism of arbitration undermine its unique advantages\, or is it necessary to ensure procedural protections for parties?\nWhat options exist outside of the conventional arbitration process? In what circumstances should parties consider these alternatives?\nCan parties reduce arbitration timelines by using virtual or hybrid formats? Is there room to automate arbitration processes by using artificial intelligence?\nHow are new arbitrators trained and selected? How can parties be encouraged to select newer and more diverse arbitrators?\n\nAfternoon break: 2:30 pm – 2:45 pm PT \nPanel 4 - Addressing the Unknown: Arbitrators respond to the use of artificial intelligence - 2:45 pm – 3:45 pm PT\nAddressing the Unknown: Arbitrators respond to the use of artificial intelligence\n\n\n \nRichard Coleman\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nMichela Fiorido\nEmployer Counsel\nHarris & Co. \n\n\n \nSebastien Anderson\nUnion Counsel\nLabour Rights Law \n\n\nGiven the lack of Canadian precedents on the use of AI to manage employees (i.e. “algorithmic management”)\, this session will provide employers and unions with the best available insight into how a grievance against algorithmic management would be mounted\, defended\, and decided in British Columbia. Using a real union challenge to an employer’s use of AI drawn from US caselaw\, experienced counsel and arbitrators will address the following questions: \n\nWhat principles in existing arbitral jurisprudence are likely to be invoked to challenge an employer’s use of algorithmic management? Is there any legislation that might constrain an employer’s use of AI in evaluating employee performance?\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 might British Columbia arbitrators find most compelling?\n\nConference ends: 4:00 pm PT \nWednesday\, November 29\, 2023Workshops*Workshops sold separately from stand-alone conference. \n9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. PT \nLabour Arbitration and Policy Conference WorkshopCrafting Consensus: Strategies for effective advocacy at mediation\n\n\n \nEric Ito\nEmployer Counsel\nCooperwilliams Truman LLP \n\n\n \nJohn McConchie\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nTamara Ramusovic\nUnion Counsel\nMoore Edgar Lyster LLP \n\n\nIn this workshop\, panelists will provide expert guidance on effectively using mediation to resolve grievances. The session will cover practical skills and key legal concepts\, equipping attendees to: \n\nRecognize when it is appropriate to use mediation to seek to resolve a grievance;\nPrepare appropriately for the mediation;\nCommunicate effectively and use different negotiating styles to relay a position\, understand opposing parties’ interests and objectives\, and bridge impasses;\nRecognize how power imbalances and “invisible” barriers may impact the mediation process and take steps to address those barriers;\nApply key legal and practical considerations in crafting settlement agreements; and\nRecognize when settlement is unlikely and arbitration is necessary.\n\nBargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference WorkshopBargaining Essentials: Skills\, tools\, and strategies for effective collective bargaining\n\n\n \nLeanne Bowes\nExecutive Director\nBC Public School Employers’ Association \n\n\n \nJeremy Bryant\nUnion Counsel\nBanister & Company \n\n\n \nAmanda Rogers\nArbitrator\, Mediator\, Lawyer \n\n\nAchieving successful bargaining outcomes requires strategy\, skill\, and the acumen to adapt. In this workshop\, experts will guide participants through the process of bargaining from the first meeting of parties up until a final agreement (or strike or arbitration). Experienced bargainers are encouraged to attend\, comment on scenarios\, and discuss their experiences with fellow bargainers. Attendees will hear panel discussions and work through scenarios highlighting a variety of bargaining essentials\, including: \n\nSetting ground rules for bargaining;\nTabling proposals and responding to counter-proposals;\nHandling package offers;\nDealing with late proposals;\nAnticipating and preparing responses;\nCommunicating with principals\, members\, and employees and respecting confidentiality;\nAddressing both parties’ priorities and developing strategies to bridge impasses;\nUnderstanding which issues can and cannot be taken to impasse;\nAnalyzing risks of lockouts and strikes;\nExploring options of mediation or interest arbitration where available; and\nFinalizing agreements.\n\n  \nCPDBargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 5.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nVancouver Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nBargaining in the Broader Public Sector Workshop CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\nVancouver Labour Arbitration and Policy Workshop CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Columbia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/vancouver-labour-arbitration-and-policy-conference/
LOCATION:The Hyatt Regency Vancouver\, 655 Burrard Street.\, Vancouver\, B.C.\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference,Conference,Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vancouver-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231121
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231123
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20230810T132354Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T174318Z
UID:9567-1700524800-1700697599@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Edmonton Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference
DESCRIPTION:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector ConferenceConference Co-Chairs\n\n \nChantel Kassongo\nEmployer Counsel\nNeuman Thompson \n\n\n \nCherie Langlois-Klassen\nUnion Counsel\nBlair Chahley Klassen \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nVictor Banfield\nDirector\, Negotiations and Policy \nHealth Sciences Association of Alberta \n\n\n \nCory Galway\nLead Negotiator\nAlberta Health Services \n\n\n \nRory Gill\nPresident\nCUPE Alberta \n\n\n \nCarl Soderstrom\nExecutive Director\nAlberta Union of Provincial Employees \n\n\n \nSteve Stringfellow\nStrategic Negotiations Lead \nProvincial Bargaining Coordination Office\nAlberta Treasury Board and Finance \n\n\n \nRuth Strong\nSenior Negotiator\nCity of Edmonton \n\n\nTuesday\, November 21\, 2023Breakfast and Registration 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. \nPanel 1 - Checking the Forecast: Experts examine the economic and fiscal climate for bargaining in Alberta\n\n\n \nJoseph Marchand\nProfessor\, Economics\nUniversity of Alberta \n\n\n \nCatherine Rothrock\nChief Economist\nAlberta Treasury Board and Finance \n\n\n \nNeil Hepburn\nEconomist\, Teacher Welfare\nAlberta Teachers’ Association \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine the economic and fiscal forecast for Alberta and Canada in 2024\, focusing on the implications for collective bargaining. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat short- and long-term economic and fiscal trends are experts predicting in 2024 in Alberta and in Canada? How does the outlook in Alberta compare to other provinces and the United States?\nHow should parties address rising costs of living when negotiating wage increases? Beyond general wage increases\, what wage adjustment mechanisms may be employed? Are longer-term wage adjustments such as periodic cost of living adjustments likely to gain traction?\nHow does the current status of the Alberta labour market compare with the federal labour market? Were more jobs gained or lost in 2023? What is the outlook for 2024?\nHow can parties tackle staffing and retention challenges during negotiations? Based on the labour market outlook\, is there greater pressure to increase wages\, or make other concessions\, to attract and retain workers?\nWill the recent increases in the federal minimum wage and the Alberta minimum wage affect bargaining\, especially negotiations pertaining to lower-wage workers?\nWhat measures are governments currently likely to prioritize in provincial and federal budgets to ensure economic growth and prosperity? How will these measures affect bargaining?\n\nMorning break 10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. \nPanel 2 - Bargaining Bulletins: Update on major caselaw and legislation\n\n\n \nTeresa Haykowsky\nEmployer Counsel\nMcLennan Ross \n\n\n \nJacqueline L. Lacasse\nGeneral Counsel\nUniversity of Calgary \n\n\n \nBill Rigutto\nUnion Representative\nAlberta Union of Provincial Employees \n\n\n \nPatrick Nugent\nUnion Counsel\nNugent Law \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will examine recent cases and legislative developments with implications for collective bargaining. Panelists will address the latest cases on government intervention in collective bargaining\, cases illustrating key principles of collective agreement interpretation\, noteworthy interest arbitration awards\, and recent labour board decisions. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most newsworthy developments. \nLunch 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. \nPanel 3 - Managing the Message: Expert guidance on communications\, misinformation\, and social media during bargaining\n\n\n \nAdam Cembrowski\nUnion Counsel\nNugent Law Office \n\n\n \nKevin Davediuk\nChief Advisor on Negotiations\nProvincial Bargaining Coordination Office\nGovernment of Alberta \n\n\n \nGabriel Joshee-Arnal\nEmployer Counsel\nNeuman Thompson \n\n\n \nKate Robinson\nNegotiator\nAlberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) \n\n\nCrafting and presenting messages effectively\, accurately\, and lawfully is critical to successful negotiations. In this session\, panelists will discuss strategies for employers and unions seeking to manage communications before\, during\, and after collective bargaining. Specifically\, the panel will address: \n\nWhat key information should be communicated to employees or members during bargaining? How should these communications be framed?\nWhat types of communications with employees are permissible under the Alberta Labour Relations Code during bargaining and what types of practices may be in violation of the Code?\nHow can employers and unions ensure that they get the information needed from each other and from employees in order to determine their bargaining positions?\nHow can employers and unions communicate effectively with one another during bargaining? What are best practices in presenting proposals\, responding to counterproposals\, and bridging an impasse?\nWhat adjustments\, if any\, should bargaining teams make to prepare effectively for communicating proposals and negotiating in a virtual or hybrid environment?\nHas there been an increase in recent years in rejected tentative agreements? Are there communication practices that may help avoid this outcome?\nWhat limits exist\, if any\, on communications with the media during collective bargaining? How should employers and unions respond to unintentional information “leaks”?\nWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of social media during bargaining when organizing employees\, assessing bargaining realities\, and taking into account privacy and confidentiality concerns?\nHow can parties manage misinformation in an increasingly digital world and evaluate the accuracy of information surrounding negotiations?\n\nAfternoon Break 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nPanel 4 - Tech Talk: Experts analyze technology and privacy issues in bargaining\n\n\n \nNicole Denier\nAssistant Professor\nUniversity of Alberta \n\n\n \nErin Ludwig\nLegal Counsel – Employment\, Labour and Privacy\nAlberta Health Services \n\n\n \nLeanne Chahley\nUnion Counsel\nBlair Chahley Klassen \n\n\nIn this session\, expert panelists will provide guidance on addressing\, through collective bargaining\, rapidly progressing technology\, increased monitoring and surveillance capabilities\, and resulting privacy implications for the workplace. Panelists will address questions including: \n\nAre concerns about the impact of artificial intelligence (“AI”) on work overblown? Is this technological advance different from previous technological revolutions that raised concerns about mass unemployment and dehumanization of work? Which jobs and sectors are expected to be most affected?\nWhat key impacts resulting from the use of AI in workplaces should be addressed through collective bargaining? What lessons can be learned from language introduced to address past technological developments?\nWill human resources be taken over by “algorithmic management\,” 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? How should parties address the potential use of algorithmic management in collective agreements?\nHow have arbitrators treated the use of emerging monitoring and surveillance technologies intended to measure employee productivity or performance\, such as biometric scanning\, wearables\, GPS tracking\, and keystroke monitoring software? What lessons can be learned from these decisions when negotiating collective agreement language?\nDo employers have a right to engage in off-duty surveillance of employees through digital or technological means? If so\, can this right be limited through collective agreement language?\nAre employees entitled to information about how their employer is using AI and monitoring and surveillance technologies? How much say do unions and their members currently have in what employee information employers collect and how it is used? How can collective bargaining provisions address these issues?\n\nConference ends 3:45 p.m. \nWednesday\, November 22\, 2023Workshop*Workshop sold separately from stand-alone conference. \n9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. \nDifficult Bargaining: Identifying and overcoming obstacles to agreement\n\n\n \nTrevor Sones\nAdjunct Professor\, Sauder School of Business\nUniversity of British Columbia \n\n\n \nChantel Kassongo\nEmployer Counsel\nNeuman Thompson \n\n\n \nMaryna McTague \nUnion Counsel\nSeveny Scott \n\n\nFinding the common ground that makes negotiation of a collective agreement possible can be a difficult process at the best of times. However\, when external factors such as funding cuts and government-imposed mandates seriously limit the options available to unions and employers\, a normally difficult process can become nearly impossible. Is there a way to make the process easier\, or to prevent parties from becoming so entrenched in their own positions and views such that agreement is impossible? \nIn this interactive full-day workshop\, an experienced mediator along with two seasoned negotiators from both sides of the table will provide guidance on effectively using interest-based and other approaches to bargaining. Participants will learn to: \n\nUse more productive strategies when engaged in positional bargaining;\nIdentify situations in which interest-based bargaining can be used effectively;\nCommunicate effectively to identify needs and interests underlying demands;\nGenerate creative options to solve tough problems; and\nBuild and preserve productive union-management relationships through bargaining.\n\nCPDConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.25 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 5.25 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 5.25 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/edmonton-bargaining-in-the-broader-public-sector-conference/
LOCATION:University of Alberta Conference Centre\, 11605 87 Ave NW\, Edmonton\, Alberta\, T6G 2H6\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Bargaining in the Broader Public Sector Conference,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/edmonton-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231101
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231104
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
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
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230928T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230928T161500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20230626T202957Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T184859Z
UID:8924-1695904200-1695917700@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Virtual Health & Safety Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nLoretta Bouwmeester\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews\, Dinsdale & Clark LLP \n\n\n \nWade Poziomka\nUnion Counsel\nRoss & McBride \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nKevin Kelloway\nCanada Research Chair in Occupational Health Psychology\nSaint Mary’s University \n\n\n \nKelly Kwon\nAssociate Director\, Employee Health and Wellness\nSheridan College \n\n\nThursday\, September 28\, 2023Opening remarks: 12:30 p.m. – 12:35 p.m. ET \nPanel 1: Annual Check-Up: Experts examine key cases and legislative developments - 12:35 p.m. – 1:35 p.m. ET \nAnnual Check-Up: Experts examine key cases and legislative developments\n\n\n \nJamie Jurczak\nEmployer Counsel\nTaylor McCaffrey LLP \n\n\n \nDavid Law\nEmployer Counsel\nLaw at Work \n\n\n \nMalini Vijaykumar\nUnion Counsel\nNelligan Law \n\n\n \nDawid Cieloszczyk\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon \n\n\n \nDaniel Randazzo\nMediator and Arbitrator \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will address recent cases and legislative developments impacting workplace health and safety. Topics to be addressed include: \n\nWhat lessons can be learned from recent COVID-19 decisions? What broader principles may be discerned for implementing health and safety policies likely to withstand scrutiny on judicial or arbitral review? For example: When are disciplinary consequences for failing to follow health and safety policies appropriate or enforceable? Where a given measure is intended to protect an individual from personal harm at work\, where is the line to be drawn between legitimate rules and paternalistic or overreaching policies?\nHow should workplace parties respond where an employee’s rights conflict with workplace health and safety requirements? For example: Where the employee has a disability which may impact their ability to perform work that is safety-sensitive? Where the employee argues that their religious beliefs prevent them from complying with a policy?\nWhen can employers require employees in safety-sensitive positions to undergo an independent medical examination or post-incident testing where substance abuse is suspected?\nWhat constitutes an adequate investigation into workplace harassment under occupational health and safety legislation? Can an employee dispute the choice of investigator? What steps must be taken upon completion of the investigation?\nWhat are notable trends in recent sentencing decisions for workplace health and safety violations? What key legislative developments have been implemented cross-country in the past year of note for occupational health and safety practitioners?\n\nTopics will be finalized in the weeks prior to the conference\, ensuring up-to-date coverage of the latest developments. \nKeynote: Walking the Talk in Employee Health and Wellness - 1:35 p.m. – 1:55 p.m. ET\nWalking the Talk in Employee Health and Wellness\n\n\n \nJane Storrie\nClinical Neuropsychologist\nSVA \n\n\nEmployers have been paying increasing attention to mental health and wellness across many sectors. While this interest often leads to changes in policy and even the establishment of specialized units\, departments\, or designated staffing\, it remains the case that resource allotment\, program planning\, implementation\, and measures of efficacy are sorely lacking. In this presentation\, we will explore issues underlying the successful provision of wellness services and supports\, and how they can be remedied. \nBreak: 1:55 p.m. – 2:05 p.m. ET \nPanel 2: Substance Use in the Workplace: Responding to the expanding spectrum of risks - 2:05 p.m. – 3:05 p.m. ET \n\n\n \nShelly Bischoff\nFounder and Director\nPtolemy & Associates Inc. \n\n\n \nRyan Conlin\nEmployer Counsel\nStringer LLP \n\n\n \nMatt Hiltz\nExecutive Director and Chief Negotiator\nNew Brunswick Nurses Union \n\n\nSubstance use in the workplace can pose health and safety risks that can be managed through collaboration between employers\, employees\, and unions. In this panel\, experts will explore emerging trends and best practices to assess substance use in the workplace. The following questions will be discussed: \n\nWhat steps can an employer take to proactively monitor substance use in the workplace\, particularly during breaks? What does recent caselaw suggest about an employer’s limits on ordering drug and alcohol testing\, and independent medical examinations?\n\n\nHow can an employer identify whether substance use is occurring in its workplace? What are methods of addressing substance use dependence for employees who will not actively seek help through standard workplace policies?\nWhat are best practices in reviewing and evaluating the effectiveness of workplace substance use policies? How can an employer assess whether its current policies are effective in reducing substance abuse\, identifying employees with substance use issues\, and addressing associated risks?\nIn recent years\, has there been an increased frequency of workplace harassment or violence resulting from substance use? How can workplace parties mitigate the risk of trauma for employees who respond to a substance use-related crisis in the workplace?\nFor workplaces that must now have naloxone kits on-site\, what strategies can employers use to incorporate naloxone kits into their emergency response planning? What training and support should be in place for employees who may have to use these kits? How are workplaces in other jurisdictions managing the impact of the nationwide opioid crisis?\nTo what extent should the decriminalization of certain drugs impact an employer’s policies when it comes to managing substance abuse and substance use disorders in the workplace? Will access to previously illicit drugs significantly affect the safety of the workplace?\n\nBreak: 3:05 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. ET \nPanel 3 and Closing Remarks: Caution\, Tech Ahead: The impact of technology and AI on workplace safety - 3:15 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. ET \nCaution\, Tech Ahead: The impact of technology and AI on workplace safety\n\n\n \nDr. Arif Jetha\nScientist\nInstitute for Work & Health \n\n\n \nAlanna Mihalj\nLegal Counsel\nAmalgamated Transit Union\, Local 113 \n\n\n \nAlissa Demerse\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will explore potential risks of emerging technologies on employee health and safety and discuss how workplaces can best address these risks. Specifically\, panelists will consider: \n\nWhat provisions should be included in policies or collective agreements to address the impact of emerging technologies on employee health and safety?\nIn what ways can electronic monitoring affect employee well-being? What limitations have been implemented or imposed on workplace electronic monitoring?\nHow has employee health and safety been impacted by the following:\nRemote and hybrid workplaces?\nLocation tracking?\nAutomation?\nGenerative AI?\nHow have arbitrators tailored the award of damages to the impacts of technology on employee health and safety?\nHow can workplaces balance employee privacy with safety and productivity concerns while leveraging the benefits of new and efficient technologies?\n\n\n\n\nConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resources Professionals Association.\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 3.25 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 3.2 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/virtual-health-safety-conference/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference,Health & Safety
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/national-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20230626
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20230628
DTSTAMP:20260611T071620
CREATED:20230322T225410Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T155532Z
UID:6746-1687737600-1687910399@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Calgary Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference
DESCRIPTION:Sponsored by:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nKelly Williams-Whitt\nArbitrator/Mediator and Dean\nFaculty of Business and Communication Studies Mount Royal University \n\n\n \nWilson Chan\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews Dinsdale \n\n\n \nBill Rigutto\nUnion Rep\nAUPE \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nNancy Schlesinger\nChair and Essential Services Commissioner\,\nAlberta Labour Relations Board \n\n\n \nDaniel Shapiro\nArbitrator and Mediator \n\n\n \nKristan McLeod\nUnion Counsel\, Chivers Carpenter \n\n\n \nKaren Scott\nSeveny Scott\, Partner \n\n\n \nLaura Mensch\nPartner\, BLG \n\n\n \nWes Scheuerman\nSenior Labour Relations Advisor\, Alberta Health Services \n\n\nMonday\, June 26\, 2023Pre-Conference Workshop Schedule\nBreakfast and Registration\n8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. MT \n\nIntroductory Remarks\n9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. MT \nSession 1\n9:10 a.m. – 10:25 a.m. MT \nBreak\n10:25 a.m. – 10:40 a.m. MT \nSession 2\n10:40 a.m. – 11:55 a.m. MT \nLunch\n11:55 a.m. – 1:05 p.m. MT \nSession 3\n1:05 p.m. – 2:20 p.m. MT \nBreak\n2:20 p.m. – 2:35 p.m. MT \nSession 4 and closing remarks\n2:35 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. MT \n\n\n\n\n\n\n*Workshops sold separately from stand-alone conference. \nPre-Conference Workshops (Choice Of 1 Of 3)\nDifficult Accommodations: Responding to denial\, defensiveness\, and personality disorders - 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. MT\nDifficult Accommodations: Responding to denial\, defensiveness\, and personality disorders\n\n\n \nMelissa Luhtanen\nSenior Legal Counsel\nAlberta Human Rights Commission \n\n\n \nDotun Ogunfowora\nRegistered Psychologist\nInsight Psychological & Renew Psychology \n\n\n \nTom Duke\nEmployer Counsel\nMiller Thomson LLP \n\n\n \nDavid Lardner\nUnion Representative\, Disputes and Arbitration\nAlberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) \n\n\nAccommodating employees with disabilities that impair their judgment\, perception\, and ability to cooperate can be challenging. Unfortunately\, mental health disabilities\, such as mood disorders\, can often impact the very abilities necessary for an individual to engage in the accommodation process. \nWorking through interactive exercises and realistic scenarios with the guidance of experts\, participants will develop the knowledge and skills necessary to: \n\nDevelop an understanding of how common disabilities may impede a worker’s ability to participate in the accommodation process\nDemonstrate effective communication skills when interacting with resistant or uncooperative employees\nUnderstand responsibilities surrounding the duty to inquire\, obtaining medical records\, and related privacy legislation\nComply with union and management legal obligations when workers are unwilling or unable to participate in the accommodation process\nIdentify when the threshold of undue hardship is reached\n\nBefore and After the Investigation: Preventing conflict\, restoring relationships - 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. MT\nBefore and After the Investigation: Preventing conflict\, restoring relationships\n\n\n \nBruce Graham\nEmployer Counsel\nFasken \n\n\n \nPaulette DeKelver\nMediator\nDeKelver Dispute Resolution \n\n\n \nElla Henry\nLegal & Legislative Representative\nCanadian Union of Public Employees \n\n\nWhen it comes to workplace investigations\, prevention is often better than cure. Developing workplace policies and procedures that promote informal resolution methods may minimize an employer’s need to launch a formal investigation. Where circumstances demand a formal investigation\, however\, workplace parties play a critical role in subsequent restoration efforts. \nIn this skills-based session\, participants will develop a comprehensive understanding of the following: \n\nDocumenting workplace incidents and engaging in progressive discipline to manage interpersonal conflict\nImplementing trauma-informed strategies for addressing allegations of discrimination or harassment in the workplace\nDeveloping respectful workplace policies\, anti-harassment policies\, and anti-discrimination policies\, and adequately monitoring these policies for effectiveness\nResolving workplace conflict through informal resolution methods such as mediation\, coaching\, or management intervention\, before launching a formal investigation\nRestorative processes that repair workplace culture after a formal investigation occurs\nProviding sensitivity training to workplace parties to improve working relationships\n\nImpairment at Work: Identifying causes\, addressing risks\, providing accommodation - 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. MT\nImpairment at Work: Identifying causes\, addressing risks\, providing accommodation\n\n\n \nLeanne Young\nArbitrator\nResolve ADR \n\n\n \nDr. Charl Els\nAddiction Psychiatrist\, Occupational Physician and Clinical Professor\nDepartment of Psychiatry/Department of Medicine\nUniversity of Alberta \n\n\n \nWill Cascadden\nEmployer Counsel\nGowling WLG \n\n\n \nKarlan Modeste\nLegal Counsel\nBritish Columbia Teachers’ Federation \n\n\nEmployers\, employees\, and unions are responsible for addressing impairment in the workplace. Navigating what constitutes impairment\, recognizing substance abuse\, and developing effective workplace policies and procedures for addressing impairment can present numerous complexities. This session is designed as a step-by-step guide to help parties collaborate in developing policies\, procedures\, and substance use accommodations that ensure a safe and healthy workplace. \nLegal and technical experts will guide participants through an interactive\, engaging session. Participants will leave this session with an understanding of key issues\, including the following: \n\nWhat constitutes impairment\nHow to identify the causes and symptoms of impairment\nWhat to consider in determining whether an employee has a substance use disorder\nHow employers and unions should handle the risks of impairment\nHow to develop workplace policies and procedures that address impairment\nWhen and how employers should provide accommodation for substance use disorders\, and the union’s role in the accommodation process\nWhether employers can mandate treatment\, and employee obligations to seek treatment\n\nConferenceCocktail Networking Reception - 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. MT\nCheck back soon for details \nEvening Plenary: Asset or Adversary? The role of artificial intelligence in labour relations - 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. MT\n\n\n \nJames Casey\nArbitrator\nField Law \n\n\n \nRandy Goebel\nComputer Science Professor\nUniversity of Alberta \n\n\n \nVicki Giles\nEmployer Counsel\nMcLennan Ross \n\n\n \nThomas Hesse\nPresident\nUFCW Local 401 \n\n\nLess than six months after the public launch of ChatGPT\, artificial intelligence (AI) is making a big splash in labour relations. Thousands of striking television and movie writers are demanding that restrictions on the use of AI be included in their new contract. While fears about automation killing jobs are nothing new\, current iterations of AI are raising concerns about white collar work and about the processes of labour and employment relations themselves. Join a panel of experts to explore the impact AI will have on labour relations in the near future including: \n\nWill human resources professionals be helped by AI or replaced by it?\n\n\nWill union representatives be helped\, hindered\, or replaced by AI?\n\n\nWhat are the potential uses and abuses of “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?\n\n\nWhat role will AI play in key labour relations processes\, such as arbitration\, collective agreement interpretation\, and negotiation of collective agreements?\n\n\nHow\, if at all\, should unions and employers use collective bargaining to address the potential impact of AI on jobs? In what sectors would collective agreement language addressing AI be most important?\n\nTuesday\, June 27\, 2023Breakfast: 8:00 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. MT \nPlenary 1: Notable and Newsworthy: Major caselaw and legislative developments - 8:45 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. MT\nNotable and Newsworthy: Major caselaw and legislative developments\n\n\n \nGordon Nekolaichuk\nVice-Chair\nAlberta Labour Relations Board \n\n\n \nJean Torrens\nEmployer Counsel\nMLT Aikins \n\n\n \nClayton Cook\nUnion Counsel\nMcGown Cook \n\n\nThis session will cover major caselaw and legislative updates from Alberta and across Canada. Experts will provide summaries and insight into the latest and most noteworthy cases\, while also discussing general trends. Topics to be covered include remote work\, substance abuse and drug testing\, privacy and surveillance\, discipline\, harassment\, discrimination\, and accommodation. Legislative updates will include both provincial and federal developments. Final selection of topics takes place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \nBreak: 10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. MT \nPlenary 2: Beliefs and Boundaries: Reconciling employee free speech and employer concerns - 10:15 a.m. – 11:20 a.m. MT\nBeliefs and Boundaries: Reconciling employee free speech and employer concerns\n\n\n \nCheryl Yingst Bartel\nArbitrator/Mediator\nYingst Bartel ADR Inc. \n\n\n \nLaura Dunnigan\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews Dinsdale & Clarke LLP \n\n\n \nTim Nessim\nLabour Relations Officer\nUnited Nurses of Alberta \n\n\nIs it appropriate for workplaces to monitor and impose disciplinary action on employees for off-duty and online behavior? Can policies that govern off-duty conduct be justified by the need to promote a respectful workplace? In this panel\, experts will explore employer and union responsibilities in ensuring appropriate employee conduct\, both inside and outside the workplace. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nCan an employer impose restrictions on off-duty conduct\, expression\, and political activity? Is the nature of the workplace relevant?\nWhat is the threshold for determining whether an employee’s off-duty conduct has a sufficient connection to the workplace? When does an employee’s right to express personal opinions outside the workplace become a legitimate concern for an employer?\nIn what circumstances\, if any\, is it appropriate for an employer to monitor an employee’s social media accounts? Must an employer hold a reasonable suspicion of misconduct to institute monitoring?\nWhat disciplinary measures have arbitrators deemed appropriate for off-duty misconduct?\nWhat key provisions should workplace policies and collective agreements contain to address inappropriate off-duty conduct?\n\nBreak: 11:20 a.m. – 11:35 a.m. MT \nConcurrent Session – Block 1\nPick 1 of 3: 11:35 a.m. – 12:35 p.m. MT \nConcurrent Session 1: Breaking the Impasse: Key issues in interest arbitration\nBreaking the Impasse: Key issues in interest arbitration\n\n\n \n Kristan McLeod \nManaging Partner\nChivers Carpenter \n\n\n \n Tim Mitchell \nEmployer Counsel\nMcLennan Ross \n\n\n \n Mark Asbell \nArbitrator\, Mediator\, and Adjudicator\nAsbell Dispute Resolutions \n\n\nIn this session\, seasoned experts will address key issues in interest arbitration\, lending insight into perennial principles\, providing practical guidance on procedural issues\, and examining trends in recent arbitration awards. Panelists will address questions including: \n\nWhat principles and criteria will interest arbitrators consider in crafting an award? What do recent cases suggest about how arbitrators will apply the principles of replication\, demonstrated need\, and total compensation?\nUnder what circumstances will the Alberta Labour Relations Board order first contract arbitration? How have amendments to the Labour Relations Code resulting from Bill 32\, the Restoring Balance in Alberta’s Workplaces Act\, affected the threshold for intervention?\nWhat authority does the Alberta Labour Relations Board have when parties with a prior collective agreement are unable to reach a subsequent agreement through collective bargaining? When can the Board order parties to engage in interest arbitration? Is the analysis different if the parties provide essential services?\nIn recent awards\, how have concerns such as inflation\, the employer’s ability to pay\, and recruitment and retention issues impacted the determination of whether wage adjustments were warranted?\nWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of med-arb\, arb-med\, or final offer selection\, and when may such approaches be appropriate?\n\nConcurrent Session 2: The Pandemic’s Lasting Legacy: What COVID-19 has taught us about labour relations \nThe Pandemic’s Lasting Legacy: What COVID-19 has taught us about labour relations\n\n\n \nKathryn Oviatt\nChief of the Commission and Tribunals\nAlberta Human Rights Commission \n\n\n \nJackie Laviolette\nEmployer Counsel\nMatthews Dinsdale & Clarke \n\n\n \nAdam Cembrowski\nUnion Counsel\nNugent Law \n\n\nThroughout the pandemic\, arbitrators\, courts\, and workplace parties have grappled with the challenge of applying established labour relations principles in the face of unprecedented circumstances. In this session\, expert panelists will reflect on lessons learned from this tumultuous time\, critically evaluating recent cases and exploring best practices for the future. Questions to be addressed include: \n\nWhat guidance do cases decided in the COVID-19 context provide regarding when courts and arbitrators will uphold precautionary and safety-based workplace measures such as mandatory vaccination? What measures can employers take when employees refuse vaccination? What measures are beyond permissible bounds?\nAs COVID-19 case counts decline\, will mandatory workplace vaccination policies continue to be upheld? Must employers review their policies\, and if so\, what processes should they follow?\nHow have courts and arbitrators applied the Supreme Court of Canada test in Syndicat Northcrest v. Anselem when assessing religious accommodations in the workplace during COVID-19? How are religious beliefs distinguished from political beliefs\, and how is the sincerity of those beliefs assessed?\nWhat do recent cases suggest about how arbitrators will assess the exercise of management rights under uncertain or extraordinary circumstances?\nWith many workplaces having shifted to a remote or hybrid model during the pandemic\, can employers now require employees to return to work?\nHow\, if at all\, did COVID-19 exacerbate\, ameliorate\, or expose existing workplace inequities?\nWhat “gaps” in workplace policies and collective agreements have been revealed during the pandemic? What steps should workplace parties now be taking to prepare for potential future pandemics or similarly disruptive events?\n\nConcurrent Session 3: Digital Overreach: Can existing privacy laws stop unreasonable surveillance and monitoring? \nDigital Overreach: Can existing privacy laws stop unreasonable surveillance and monitoring?\n\n\n \nMonica Bokenfohr\nEmployer Counsel\nNeuman Thompson \n\n\n \nMaryna McTague\nUnion Counsel\nSeveny Scott \n\n\n \nErika Ringseis\nSenior Legal Counsel\nInhaus Legal \n\n\nAdvances in technology and the dramatic shift to remote work due to COVID-19 have given rise to a significant interest in digital surveillance of employees. Meanwhile\, privacy legislation has remained largely static. In an era of big data and artificial intelligence\, are existing privacy laws up to the task of balancing employers’ interests in productivity and efficiency and employees’ interests in autonomy and a private life? In this session\, leading experts will tackle this question as well as the following: \n\nWhat constitutes collection of “personal employee information” for “reasonable” purposes permitted under current privacy laws in Alberta?\n\n\nHow do the privacy rights of job applicants differ from the rights of existing employees? Under current laws\, would an employer be permitted to use software to construct a personality profile of job applicants based on their internet activity?\n\n\nDo current interpretations of the reasonableness requirement appropriately balance employer interests in managing work and employee privacy rights? Do new technologies\, or new uses of technologies\, threaten the established balance?\n\n\nIs the use of algorithmic management\, in which algorithms make important employment decisions based on extensive data on employees at work\, a privacy issue or a management rights issue?\n\n\nHow much say do unions and their members currently have in what employee information employers collect and how it is used? How do collective agreement provisions address this issue? Is the status quo in need of change? If so\, why and how?\n\n\nAre conceptions of privacy held by most employees at odds with those held by employers and/or those that underlie privacy legislation? If so\, is this a problem? If it is\, how should it be remedied?\n\nLunch: 12:35 p.m. – 1:45 p.m. MT \nConcurrent Session – Block 2\nPick 1 of 3: 1:45 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. MT \nConcurrent Session 1: Breaking the Impasse: Key issues in interest arbitration\nBreaking the Impasse: Key issues in interest arbitration\n\n\n \n Kristan McLeod \nManaging Partner\nChivers Carpenter \n\n\n \n Tim Mitchell \nEmployer Counsel\nMcLennan Ross \n\n\n \n Mark Asbell \nArbitrator\, Mediator\, and Adjudicator\nAsbell Dispute Resolutions \n\n\nIn this session\, seasoned experts will address key issues in interest arbitration\, lending insight into perennial principles\, providing practical guidance on procedural issues\, and examining trends in recent arbitration awards. Panelists will address questions including: \n\nWhat principles and criteria will interest arbitrators consider in crafting an award? What do recent cases suggest about how arbitrators will apply the principles of replication\, demonstrated need\, and total compensation?\nUnder what circumstances will the Alberta Labour Relations Board order first contract arbitration? How have amendments to the Labour Relations Code resulting from Bill 32\, the Restoring Balance in Alberta’s Workplaces Act\, affected the threshold for intervention?\nWhat authority does the Alberta Labour Relations Board have when parties with a prior collective agreement are unable to reach a subsequent agreement through collective bargaining? When can the Board order parties to engage in interest arbitration? Is the analysis different if the parties provide essential services?\nIn recent awards\, how have concerns such as inflation\, the employer’s ability to pay\, and recruitment and retention issues impacted the determination of whether wage adjustments were warranted?\nWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of med-arb\, arb-med\, or final offer selection\, and when may such approaches be appropriate?\n\nConcurrent Session 2: The Pandemic’s Lasting Legacy: What COVID-19 has taught us about labour relations \nThe Pandemic’s Lasting Legacy: What COVID-19 has taught us about labour relations\n\n\n \nKathryn Oviatt\nChief of the Commission and Tribunals\nAlberta Human Rights Commission \n\n\n \nJackie Laviolette\nEmployer Counsel\nMatthews Dinsdale & Clarke \n\n\n \nAdam Cembrowski\nUnion Counsel\nNugent Law \n\n\nThroughout the pandemic\, arbitrators\, courts\, and workplace parties have grappled with the challenge of applying established labour relations principles in the face of unprecedented circumstances. In this session\, expert panelists will reflect on lessons learned from this tumultuous time\, critically evaluating recent cases and exploring best practices for the future. Questions to be addressed include: \n\nWhat guidance do cases decided in the COVID-19 context provide regarding when courts and arbitrators will uphold precautionary and safety-based workplace measures such as mandatory vaccination? What measures can employers take when employees refuse vaccination? What measures are beyond permissible bounds?\nAs COVID-19 case counts decline\, will mandatory workplace vaccination policies continue to be upheld? Must employers review their policies\, and if so\, what processes should they follow?\nHow have courts and arbitrators applied the Supreme Court of Canada test in Syndicat Northcrest v. Anselem when assessing religious accommodations in the workplace during COVID-19? How are religious beliefs distinguished from political beliefs\, and how is the sincerity of those beliefs assessed?\nWhat do recent cases suggest about how arbitrators will assess the exercise of management rights under uncertain or extraordinary circumstances?\nWith many workplaces having shifted to a remote or hybrid model during the pandemic\, can employers now require employees to return to work?\nHow\, if at all\, did COVID-19 exacerbate\, ameliorate\, or expose existing workplace inequities?\nWhat “gaps” in workplace policies and collective agreements have been revealed during the pandemic? What steps should workplace parties now be taking to prepare for potential future pandemics or similarly disruptive events?\n\nConcurrent Session 3: Digital Overreach: Can existing privacy laws stop unreasonable surveillance and monitoring? \nDigital Overreach: Can existing privacy laws stop unreasonable surveillance and monitoring?\n\n\n \nMonica Bokenfohr\nEmployer Counsel\nNeuman Thompson \n\n\n \nMaryna McTague\nUnion Counsel\nSeveny Scott \n\n\n \nErika Ringseis\nSenior Legal Counsel\nInhaus Legal \n\n\nAdvances in technology and the dramatic shift to remote work due to COVID-19 have given rise to a significant interest in digital surveillance of employees. Meanwhile\, privacy legislation has remained largely static. In an era of big data and artificial intelligence\, are existing privacy laws up to the task of balancing employers’ interests in productivity and efficiency and employees’ interests in autonomy and a private life? In this session\, leading experts will tackle this question as well as the following: \n\nWhat constitutes collection of “personal employee information” for “reasonable” purposes permitted under current privacy laws in Alberta?\n\n\nHow do the privacy rights of job applicants differ from the rights of existing employees? Under current laws\, would an employer be permitted to use software to construct a personality profile of job applicants based on their internet activity?\n\n\nDo current interpretations of the reasonableness requirement appropriately balance employer interests in managing work and employee privacy rights? Do new technologies\, or new uses of technologies\, threaten the established balance?\n\n\nIs the use of algorithmic management\, in which algorithms make important employment decisions based on extensive data on employees at work\, a privacy issue or a management rights issue?\n\n\nHow much say do unions and their members currently have in what employee information employers collect and how it is used? How do collective agreement provisions address this issue? Is the status quo in need of change? If so\, why and how?\n\n\nAre conceptions of privacy held by most employees at odds with those held by employers and/or those that underlie privacy legislation? If so\, is this a problem? If it is\, how should it be remedied?\n\nBreak: 2:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. MT \nPlenary 3: Potholes on the Road to Justice: Addressing delay\, abuse of process\, and undue legalization in arbitration - 3:00 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. MT\nPotholes on the Road to Justice: Addressing delay\, abuse of process\, and undue legalization in arbitration\n\n\n \nBruce Moffatt\nExecutive Director\nMediation Services\, Alberta Government \n\n\n \nRobert S. Abells\nArbitrator \n\n\n \nErin Ludwig\nAssociate General Counsel\, Labour and Employment\nAlberta Health Services \n\n\n \nKaren Thibault\nUnion Counsel\, Disuptes and Arbitrations\nAUPE \n\n\nArbitration procedures have evolved significantly in recent years. Parties and practitioners have raised concerns about judicialization\, timeliness of the process\, difficulties in selecting arbitrators\, and the ability to address abuses of process effectively. In this panel\, experts will address the following: \n\nWhat common bottlenecks do parties encounter in the arbitral process? How can labour practitioners eliminate unnecessary delays?\nDoes the growing legalism of arbitration undermine its unique advantages\, or is it necessary to ensure procedural protections for parties?\nWhat options exist outside of the conventional arbitration process? In what circumstances should parties consider these alternatives?\nShould workplace parties consider creating unique expedited arbitration systems akin to the dispute resolution model between Canadian Railways and their unions?\nCan parties reduce arbitration timelines by participating in a virtual format? Is there room to automate arbitration processes by using artificial intelligence?\nHow are new arbitrators trained and selected? How can parties be encouraged to select newer and more diverse arbitrators?\nWhat enhancements could be implemented to improve arbitration processes and outcomes?\n\nEnd of Conference: 4:15 p.m. MT \nConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 7.35 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 7.35 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 7.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 7.35 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\nWorkshop CPD\n\n\nThe Pre-Conference workshops have been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nThe Pre-Conference workshops have been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThe Pre-Conference workshops have been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThe Pre-Conference workshops have been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/calgary-labour-arbitration-and-policy-conference/
LOCATION:The Westin Calgary\, 320 4 Avenue Southwest\, Calgary\, Alberta\, T2P 2S6\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Labour Arbitration and Policy Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/calgary-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230516T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230518T154500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071621
CREATED:20230322T031803Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T182055Z
UID:6616-1684224000-1684424700@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Atlantic Canada Labour Law Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nJudith Begley\nLawyer\, Workplace Investigator\, and Mediator\nBegley Law \n\n\n \nAndrew Nielsen\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nTara Erskine\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews\, Dinsdale & Clark LLP \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nChris Peddigrew\nArbitrator/Mediator and Vice-Chairperson\,\nNewfoundland and Labrador Labour Relations Board \n\n\n \nTracey Pinder\nAtlantic Regional Director\nCUPE \n\n\n \nMatt Hiltz\nExecutive Director and Chief Negotiatior\nNew Brunswick Nurses Union \n\n\n \nJessica Upshaw\nSolicitor\nNova Scotia Power \n\n\n \nKaren Milligan\nHR Manager\nHealth PEI \n\n\nTuesday\, May 16\, 2023Breakfast and Registration – 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. AT\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:05 a.m. AT \nWorkshop - Medical Information in Accommodation and Adjudication: Practical guidance for employers and unions\nMedical Information in Accommodation and Adjudication: Practical guidance for employers and unions\n\n\n \nJasmine Walsh\nChair\nNova Scotia Labour Board \n\n\n \nKaren Joudrey\nInstructor and Academic Coordinator Disability Management Certificate Program and the Department of\nOccupational Therapy Dalhousie University\n\n\n \nDawn Learning\nAtlantic Region Human Rights Representative\nCUPE \n\n\n \nAnnie Gray\nEmployer Counsel\nStewart McKelvey \n\n\nIt is generally accepted that employers must request no more employee personal health information than is necessary for legitimate purposes such as administering sick leave or disability benefits\, providing accommodation under human rights legislation\, or ensuring workplace health and safety and/or an employee’s fitness to work. However\, the application of this principle to specific cases generates endless controversy because employers\, unions\, employees\, and healthcare providers often each have their own ideas of what is “reasonable.” This session is designed to provide a common framework that will enable workplace parties to balance employees’ privacy rights with employers’ needs for employee personal health information. \nGuided by experienced counsel and a medical expert\, participants will learn the legal framework governing the collection\, use\, and storage of employee personal health information\, practical strategies for obtaining and reviewing information from health care professionals\, and key principles regarding using medical information at arbitration. Participants will leave ready to: \n\nassess the reasonableness of requests for employees’ personal health information;\nevaluate the adequacy of information provided and respond appropriately to vague or deficient information;\napproach employees/union members about needed information with sensitivity;\nwrite requests that prompt timely\, useful responses from health care providers and medical experts;\nevaluate the appropriateness and utility of standardized medical information forms;\ndetermine what type of information should be obtained from different health care professionals (e.g. general practitioners\, medical specialists\, psychologists\, occupational therapists) 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\nWednesday\, May 17\, 2023Breakfast and Registration – 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. AT\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:05 a.m. AT \nPanel 1 - The Latest in Labour: Experts address key cases and legislative developments 9:05 a.m. – 10:20 a.m. AT\nThe Latest in Labour: Experts address key cases and legislative developments\n\n\n \nDavid Conway\nAdjudicator\, Arbitrator\, Mediator and\nIndependent Counsel \n\n\n \nSandra Mullen\nPresident Nova Scotia Government & General\nEmployees Union \n\n\n \nJames LeMesurier\nEmployer Counsel\nStewart McKelvey \n\n\nIn this panel\, seasoned experts will canvass significant legal developments of the past year\, discussing key cases\, ongoing litigation\, and legislative reforms. Topics to be addressed include issues of jurisdiction\, workplace substance use policies\, collective agreement issues\, proof of vaccination and vaccine mandate issues\, and human rights cases. Legislative updates from across the Atlantic provinces will also be discussed\, including emergency leave\, pay transparency\, and union strike rules. Final selection of topics takes place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \nKeynote - The Other Wet Floor: Psychological Occupational Risk in Helping Professions 10:20 a.m. - 10:40 a.m. AT\nThe Other Wet Floor: Psychological Occupational Risk in Helping Professions\n\n\n \nJ.D. Gilmour\nManager of Employee Abilities and Return to Work\nHealth PEI \n\n\nBreak 10:40 a.m. – 10:55 a.m. AT \nPanel 2 -Recovering the Balance: Practical guidance on flexible work\, the right to disconnect\, and avoiding burnout 10:55 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. AT\nRecovering the Balance: Practical guidance on flexible work\, the right to disconnect\, and avoiding burnout\n\n\n \nFrank Demont\, K.C.\nArbitrator\nResolve Arbitration & Mediation Services \n\n\n \nMary Fougere\nNational Staff Representative\nCUPE \n\n\n \nEmily McDonald\nLawyer and Consultant\nHR Atlantic \n\n\nEmployers must consider their obligation to prevent mental health harms\, including burnout\, stress\, and the consequences of working remotely. Questions to be discussed include: \n\nHow have adjudicators and courts in recent cases defined an employer’s responsibilities and an employee’s rights when it comes to workplace stress\, burnout\, and other contributors to mental health harms?\nHow can employers and unions identify and prevent organizational factors that cause mental health harms? What steps can be taken by employers\, unions\, and workers to address these factors?\nHow can employers\, unions\, and workers actively reduce the mental health harms that may be associated with remote work?\nHow should the “right to disconnect” be defined in corporate policies where such policies are required by legislation? How has it worked in jurisdictions where this right has been legislated? Is it a necessary tool for the well-being of employees?\nDoes the right to disconnect assist in preventing mental health harms to employees who are not working traditional 9-to-5 shift schedules?\nHas remote work blurred the line between overwork and overtime? How can employers and unions ensure that there is a workable distinction?\nIn protecting and promoting workers’ mental health\, including efforts to prevent and reduce stress and burnout in the workplace\, what role is there for the National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace?\n\nLunch 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. \nPanel 3 - Investigations under a Microscope: An examination of current best practices and recent developments 1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. AT\nInvestigations under a Microscope: An examination of current best practices and recent developments\n\n\n \nKrista Smith\nWorkplace Investigator Root and Branch \n\n\n \nRyan McCarville\nLawyer\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nRay Mitchell\nLegal Counsel\nInternational Union of Painters and Allied Trades\nDistrict Council 39 \n\n\nWorkplace investigators often grapple with issues of bias\, fact-finding\, and confidentiality that may emerge during an investigation. In this session\, experts will discuss important developments in this area\, in addition to practices and policies that safeguard fair and effective investigations: \n\nConsidering the need to preserve a fair\, adequate\, and effective investigation process\, what lessons can be drawn from recent cases about the proper scope of an employer’s investigation?\nWhat are the essential qualities or qualifications of a competent investigator? When should an external investigator be retained?\nHow do unconscious and implicit biases impact human rights investigations in the workplace? What can be done to avoid them?\nHow can investigators\, in the fact-finding and report-writing process\, address pervasive systemic discrimination in the workplace?\nHow does adopting a trauma-informed approach to conducting witness interviews affect an investigation?\nWhat is the role of the union in an investigation? What are the limitations of union involvement?\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?\nWhat are best practices for drafting investigation reports?\nWhat are the crucial components of an anti-harassment policy? How can an organization adequately monitor its policies for effectiveness? What measures should an employer take when an allegation is not substantiated?\n\nBreak 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nPanel 4 - Disabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions 2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. AT\nDisabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions\n\n\n \nDr. Alexis Goth\nPhysician\nIntegrated Chronic Care Service (ICCS) \n\n\n \nJillian Houlihan\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nJames Green\nEmployer Counsel\nCox and Palmer \n\n\nWorkplace parties are familiar with applying principles regarding the duty to accommodate in cases of visible disabilities\, well-known conditions\, or conditions for which there exists a clear diagnostic test. However\, challenges often arise when an employee seeks accommodation for a condition that eludes diagnosis. In this session\, experts will address 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 this list?\nIs a definitive diagnosis\, or “objective evidence\,” necessary to establish an invisible 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 in cases 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 malingering? When will an employer be justified in seeking further information\, including a specialist’s report or an independent medical examination?\nMay 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? Does the fact that a disability is difficult to diagnose impact the assessment of whether the employer has accommodated the employee up to the point of undue hardship?\nHow do the stereotypes and stigmas associated with these medical conditions contribute to the challenge of providing accommodation?\nWhere an employee has a difficult-to-diagnose disability that manifests episodically\, is an employer legally permitted to request medical information from the employee on a periodic or ongoing basis?\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 will help individuals coping with Long COVID? How can employers and unions cooperate to support such employees in the workplace?\n\nNetworking Reception 3:45 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. AT \nThursday\, May 18\, 2023Breakfast and Registration – 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. AT\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. AT \nPanel 5 - Digital Dignity: Protecting privacy in an era of workplace surveillance 9:05 a.m. – 10:20 a.m. AT\nDigital Dignity: Protecting privacy in an era of workplace surveillance\n\n\n \nDavid Fraser\nPrivacy Lawyer and Partner\nMcInnes Cooper \n\n\n \nDaniel Leger\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nErin Delaney\nSolicitor\nDepartment of Justice and Public SafetyGovernment of Newfoundland and Labrador\n\n\nHow can employers and unions ensure that workplace surveillance is reasonable and does not encroach on employees’ rights? In this panel\, experts will discuss best practices in balancing employee privacy against the use of monitoring technologies in the workplace. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat key items should employers and unions address in policies and collective agreement provisions governing privacy and surveillance?\nWhat workplace surveillance is permitted under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?\nDo proposed changes in the federal Digital Charter Implementation Act\, 2022 (Bill C-27) adequately address the criticism that existing privacy legislation does not comprehensively respond to the availability of mass data collection on employees?\nHow have arbitral attitudes towards workplace privacy evolved in response to modern surveillance technologies?\nWhat concerns do keystroke mapping technologies and other methods of surveillance pose for employees’ privacy and human rights?\nWhat is the proper balance between a remote employee’s right to privacy in their home and an employer’s legitimate supervisory interests?\nCan employees object to off-duty surveillance? If so\, how should off-duty surveillance be addressed in policies and collective agreements?\nWhat continuing practices should employers and unions apply to ensure that employee information is kept confidential and secure?\n\nBreak 10:20 a.m. – 10:35 a.m. AT \nPanel 6 - Off-Duty\, Off-Base? Balancing freedom of expression and the right to a respectful workplace 10:35 a.m. - 11:50 a.m. AT\nOff-Duty\, Off-Base? Balancing freedom of expression and the right to a respectful workplace\n\n\n \nLynne Poirier\nArbitrator\, Mediator and Vice-chair Canada\nIndustrial Relations Board and Nova Scotia Labour Board\n\n\n \nKevin Kindred\nSolicitor\, the Department of Justice\nGovernment of Nova Scotia \n\n\n \nLeah Kutcher\nIn-House Counsel\nNova Scotia Teachers Union \n\n\nWhere should the line be drawn between safeguarding employee freedom of expression and ensuring a workplace free from harassment and inappropriate or offensive communications? Is it relevant if an employee’s off-duty conduct is offensive to co-workers? In this panel\, experts will explore employer and union responsibilities in ensuring appropriate employee conduct\, both inside and outside the workplace. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat key provisions should be included in workplace policies and collective agreements to address inappropriate conduct? Can these provisions encompass off-duty conduct?\nAre employers permitted to limit how employees represent themselves while off-duty? Is the nature of the business relevant?\nCan employers or unions offer or require training regarding off-duty conduct?\nCan employers ban workplace discussions on controversial or political topics in the workplace? If so\, how would a topic be assessed as “political” or “controversial”?\nWhat are the duties of unions when representing members facing consequences for expressing unpopular opinions in the workplace? Is the union’s duty any different if the member is being disciplined for expressions made outside the workplace?\nDoes an employee have any duty to report a controversial off-duty statement by another employee?\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions to ensure that an employee’s Charter or Human Rights Act rights are supported while maintaining a workplace free from discrimination and harassment?\n\nLunch 11:50 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. \nPanel 7 - Disciplinary Dilemmas: When is coaching discipline? When is union representation required? When is there a right to remain silent? 1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. AT\nDisciplinary Dilemmas: When is coaching discipline? When is union representation required? When is there a right to remain silent?\n\n\n \nTrisha Perry\nMediator/Vice-Chair\nNew Brunswick Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal \n\n\n \nJames Farrell\nSolicitor and Staff Representative\nFFAW-Unifor \n\n\n \nKyle MacIsaac\nEmployer Counsel\nMatthews Dinsdale \n\n\nRights and responsibilities differ when an employer is engaging in job “coaching” or performance management as opposed to imposing formal discipline. In this session\, expert speakers will examine key issues pertaining to disciplinary processes\, addressing questions such as: \n\nHow can parties clearly differentiate job coaching and training\, performance management\, and discipline? When and to what extent can management take action to improve worker performance without this amounting to a formal warning or other disciplinary act?\nWhat circumstances trigger an employee’s right to union representation? How have arbitrators distinguished meetings or discussions which are merely “investigatory” or otherwise non-disciplinary from those which are disciplinary and attract procedural protections? Where an employee does have a right to union representation\, must an employer inform the employee of that right?\nDo employees have a qualified right to remain silent in investigative meetings where they reasonably believe a disclosure may expose them to discipline? May employees be disciplined solely due to their decision to remain silent? When employees are or may be subject to criminal charges in relation to the factual circumstances underpinning an investigatory or disciplinary meeting\, may those employees seek to protect themselves against self-incrimination?\nhat ought an employer do to ensure fairness toward an employee in the course of a disciplinary meeting or process? Where an employer fails to follow procedural requirements in relation to a disciplinary meeting\, or unnecessarily delays the disciplinary process\, will this impact an arbitrator’s willingness to uphold a disciplinary measure?\nWhere a union representative participates in a disciplinary meeting\, what is the scope of that representative’s role?\nHow may an employee’s conduct during a disciplinary meeting impact an arbitrator’s assessment as to whether to uphold the discipline imposed?\n\nBreak 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nPanel 8 - Is Virtual the New Reality? Debating the pros and cons of virtual labour relations 2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. AT\nIs Virtual the New Reality? Debating the pros and cons of virtual labour relations\n\n\n \nNoella Martin\nEmployer Counsel\nWickwire Holm \n\n\n \nBrenda Comeau\nUnion Counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\n \nScott Sterns\nArbitrator and Mediator \n\n\n\nAre virtual hearings a comparable substitute for in-person hearings? What is lost or gained when conducting hearings virtually?\n\na. Do virtual proceedings allow for more inclusivity and access to justice? If so\, how?\nb. Do virtual proceedings pose any concerns regarding credibility?\nc. Can demeanor and body language be assessed virtually?\nd. Have virtual proceedings reduced costs and delays?\n\n\nHow have parties adapted to bargaining virtually?\nWhat steps should labour relations professionals take to ensure privacy and confidentiality is respected during virtual proceedings?\nDo Canadian labour relations professionals have a “duty of technological competence” similar to duties imposed on American attorneys?\nAre additional technological safeguards necessary for virtual discussions regarding personal health information or other confidential matters?\nWhat steps should unions take to ensure that there is effective representation and cohesion among members who primarily communicate remotely?\nHow should virtual labour relations practices be addressed in workplace policies or collective agreements?\n\nConference ends – 3:45 p.m. \nConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Nova Scotia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/atlantic-canada-labour-law-conference/
LOCATION:Hotel Halifax\, 1990 Barrington Street\, Scotia Square\, Halifax\, Nova Scotia\, B3J 1P2\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Labour Law & Labour Policy
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/portrait/halifax-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20230419T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20230419T123500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071621
CREATED:20230405T235210Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230414T214458Z
UID:7739-1681894800-1681907700@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Ontario Micro Conference on Gender Equity (Virtual Event)
DESCRIPTION:Wednesday\, April 19\, 2023Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. \nPanel 1 - Paving the Path to Gender Equity: Exploring recent caselaw\, contract clauses\, and legislation 9:10 a.m. – 10:40 a.m. ET\nPaving the Path to Gender Equity: Exploring recent caselaw\, contract clauses\, and legislation\n\n\n \nNicole Biros-Bolton\nAssociate (Human Rights Law)\nRoss & McBride LLP \n\n\n \nAnna Matas\nSenior Lawyer\,\nGillian Hnatiw & Co \n\n\n \nJan Borowy\nPartner\, Cavalluzzo \n\n\nIn this panel\, experts will discuss caselaw addressing workplace harassment\, discrimination\, and pay equity\, examine emerging trends in remedies\, and explore significant legislative updates related to gender equity. Panelists will also canvass emerging contract language promoting workplace equity in the areas of sex\, sexual orientation\, gender identity and expression\, and family status. Final selection of topics takes place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. The speakers and materials for this session will address the following questions\, among others: \n\nHow have adjudicators acknowledged sex- and gender-based barriers in recruitment\, retention\, and advancement? What aspects of hiring and promotion processes have weighed in favour of\, or against\, a finding of discrimination? What principles can be drawn from recent cases in which adjudicators found\, or declined to find\, that employer policies or actions had a discriminatory impact on employees because of pregnancy or family status?\nWhat trends in discipline and remedies are discernible in recent caselaw addressing workplace sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination? What aggravating and mitigating factors have impacted adjudicators’ decisions?\nHow have courts and adjudicators applied the Ontario Pay Equity Act in recent cases? What principles can be drawn from the Court of Appeal’s decision in Ontario Nurses’ Association v. Participating Nursing Homes regarding the proxy method and the Divisional Court’s decision in Ontario Nurses’ Association v. 10 Community Care Access Centres holding that employers are not statutorily required to bargain pay equity?\nWhere the Ontario Pay Equity Act does not directly apply\, what factors have influenced a determination of whether gender-based pay discrimination has occurred? For example: What factors were determinative in the Court of Appeal decision in Ontario (Health) v. Association of Ontario Midwives that upheld a finding of gender discrimination and a retroactive wage increase for Ontario midwives? On what basis did the court find in Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association v. His Majesty that Bill 124 did not violate Charter equality rights?\nHas progress on closing the gender pay gap been made in Ontario? in Canada? Are recent cross-country legislative reforms — such as the introduction of the federal Pay Equity Act\, the introduction of pay equity legislation in Newfoundland\, and consultations regarding pay transparency measures in British Columbia — indicative of a growing commitment to pay equity?\nWhat key legislative reforms have been introduced that are intended to further gender equity at work? For example: What are the implications of Canada’s recent ratification of the international Violence and Harassment Convention\, 2019 (C190)? Is legislation such as the newly introduced U.S. Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act and Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act necessary in Canada? What amendments to the federal Employment Equity Act relating to gender and sexual orientation are being considered in the course of the legislation’s ongoing review?\nHow can employers and unions modify contract language to promote workplace equity in the areas of sex\, sexual orientation\, gender identity and expression\, and family status? For example: What changes should be made to leave\, benefits\, training\, recruitment\, retention\, and advancement provisions?\nDoes the recent certification of class action proceedings related to workplace sexual harassment and discrimination signal an increasing potential for success in pursuing these claims on a systemic scale?\n\nBreak 10:40 a.m. – 10:55 a.m. ET \nKeynote Speaker 10:55 a.m. - 11:40 a.m. ET\nLessons from the past for the post #MeToo Workplace\n\n\n \nPeggy Nash\nSenior Advisor and Chair of the Advisory Committee of the Centre for Labour Management Relations at the Ted Rogers School of Management at TMU \n\n\nIn a post #MeToo and post “because it’s 2015” environment\, we assume that workplaces are gender equal and respectful. Yet all too often we hear about continuing challenges with gender biases and outright harassment in the workplace. Ongoing problems in the RCMP capture headlines\, but they are far from alone as institutions struggling to make progress. Women continue to drop out of jobs\, giving up because they just don’t believe that they are valued or that they want to continue to push back against the barriers they face. While we have made significant progress\, many organizations still struggle to find solutions. However\, there are some lessons to be learned from workplaces that have been grappling with these issues for decades.Break 11:40 a.m. – 11:55 a.m. \nPanel 2 - One Size Does Not Fit All: Fashioning non-discriminatory dress code policies 11:55 a.m. - 12:45 p.m. ET\nOne Size Does Not Fit All: Fashioning non-discriminatory dress code policies\n\n\n \nDavid Jewitt\nArbitrator and Mediator \n\n\n \nNiiti Simmonds\nPartnerCavalluzzo \n\n\n \nMegan Mah\nPartnerWeirfoulds LLP \n\n\nEmployers are entitled to establish workplace dress codes in accordance with the operational needs of the organization. In doing so\, however\, employers must ensure that dress code policies comply with the Ontario Human Rights Code. In this panel\, experts will examine the development of dress code policies in light of employees’ personal preferences and religious obligations\, discussing the following: \n\nWhat are best practices for employers when developing workplace dress code policies? What are best practices for employers and unions when addressing an employee’s non-compliance with dress code policies?\nWhat recent human rights complaints have resulted from workplace dress code policies?\nWhen developing dress code policies\, what lessons can Canadian employers learn from employers in other jurisdictions?\nWhat are best practices in crafting dress code policies that use gender-inclusive language? How have organizations incorporated gender-neutral and inclusive dress code policies into their workplaces?\nWhat guidance has the Ontario Human Rights Commission issued for employers in industries which tend to have gender-specific or “sexualized” dress code policies?\nWhen\, if ever\, can an employer ask an employee to remove religious attire to comply with a workplace health and safety policy? What are other aspects of dress code policies that may intersect with health and safety concerns?\nTo what extent can an employer dictate the grooming habits of its employees? In what circumstances\, if any\, can an employer restrict the use of make-up or jewelry\, or the visibility of tattoos and body modifications\, in the workplace?\nWhat should employers consider when mandating dress code policies for remote workers?\n\nEnd of Micro-Conference – 12:45 p.m. \nMicro-Conference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 3.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 3.5 substantive hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/ontario-micro-conference-on-gender-equity/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/Gender-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20230417T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20230418T154500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071621
CREATED:20230317T232601Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T152317Z
UID:6372-1681718400-1681832700@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Toronto Human Rights and Accommodation Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nYasmeena Mohamed\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nRishi Bandhu\nEmployer Counsel\nBandhu Law Professional Corporation \n\n\n \nMae J. Nam\nUnion Counsel\nRyder Wright Holmes Bryden Nam LLP \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nJeanie Theoharis\nAssociate Chair\nHuman Rights Tribunal of Ontario \n\n\n \nNathaniel Marshall\nEmployer Counsel and Workplace Investigator\nMarshall Workplace Law \n\n\n \nNatalie Jacyk\nSenior Human Rights Officer\nHuman Rights Office Toronto District School Board \n\n\n \nFridmar Facunda\nSupervisor\, Equity & Member Education Units\, OPSEU \n\n\n \nSaranjit Singh Cheema\nLegal Counsel\,\nLiUNA Ontario Provincial District Council \n\n\nMonday\, April 17\, 2023Breakfast and Registration – 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. \nPanel 1 - Human Rights Headlines: The latest caselaw and legislative developments 9:10 a.m. – 10:25 a.m. ET\nHuman Rights Headlines: The latest caselaw and legislative developments\n\n\n \nEsi Codjoe\nEmployer Counsel\nTurnpenney Milne LLP \n\n\n \nMatthew Horner\nCounsel\nOntario Human Rights Commission \n\n\n \nMatthew Hrycyna\nGrievance Officer\nOPSEU \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will review the most important legal developments of the past year and flag significant ongoing litigation and legislative reform. Topics to be addressed include discrimination\, harassment\, privacy\, and drug testing policies. Other updates to be discussed include the implementation of electronic monitoring policy requirements and the regulation of NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) in post-secondary sexual abuse allegations. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \nBreak 10:25 a.m. – 10:40 a.m. ET \nPanel 2 - Investigations Under the Magnifying Glass: A close look at significant developments 10:40 a.m. - 11:55 a.m. ET\nInvestigations Under the Magnifying Glass: A close look at significant developments\n\n\n \nNathaniel Marshall\nEmployer Counsel and Workplace Investigator\nMarshall Workplace Law \n\n\n \nKirsty Niglas-Collins\nUnion Counsel\nUnified LLP \n\n\n \nSharon Naipaul\nConsultant\, Mediator\, and Trainer\nStrategic Workplace Equity and Conflict Resolution Solutions \n\n\nWorkplace investigators often grapple with issues of bias\, fact-finding\, and confidentiality that may emerge during an investigation. In this session\, experts will discuss important developments in these areas\, in addition to practices and policies that safeguard fair and effective investigations: \n\nWhat lessons can be drawn from recent cases about the limits on an employer’s investigation\, taking into account the need to preserve a fair\, adequate\, and effective investigation process?\nHow do unconscious and implicit biases impact human rights investigations in the workplace? What can be done to avoid them?\nHow do investigators\, in the fact-finding and report-writing process\, address pervasive systemic discrimination in the workplace?\nHow does adopting a trauma-informed approach to conducting witness interviews affect the affect the nature of the investigation?\nHow should workplace parties address the challenges of conducting investigations in a remote work environment? Is there any proven or perceived benefit to conducting workplace investigations in-person?\nWhat are best practices for drafting investigation reports?\n\nLunch 11:55 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. \nPanel 3 - Disabilities that elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. PST\nDisabilities that elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions\n\n\n \nSimmy Sahdra\nEmployer Counsel\nMcCarthy Tetrault LLC \n\n\n \nDr. Alexandra Rendely\nSports Medicine Doctor\nUniversity Health Network Toronto Rehabilitation Clinic\n\n\n \nJustin Amaral\nUnion Counsel\nMorrison Watts \n\n\nWorkplace parties are familiar with applying principles regarding the duty to accommodate in cases of visible disabilities\, well-known conditions\, or conditions for which there exists a clear diagnostic test. However\, challenges arise when an employee seeks accommodation for a condition that eludes diagnosis. In this session\, experts will address 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 this list?\nWhat medical evidence is an employer legally permitted to request to establish an employee’s right to accommodation in such cases? Is a definitive diagnosis\, or “objective evidence\,” necessary to establish an invisible disability?\nHow can employers and unions effectively formulate requests for medical information in cases where an employee’s condition cannot be confirmed using a clinician’s diagnostic test? What types of information should employees request from doctors in such cases?\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 malingering? When will an employer be justified in seeking further information\, including a specialist’s report or an independent medical examination?\nHow might stereotypes and stigma associated with these medical conditions contribute to the challenge of providing accommodation?\nHow might eligibility requirements for short- and long-term disability insurance programs pose additional complications in such cases? Where an employee has been denied disability benefits\, and that denial is later held to be improper\, which party will be liable for the denial?\nWhat types of accommodations may be of assistance to an employee suffering from persistent symptoms such as pain\, fatigue\, or cognitive difficulties? For example\, what will help individuals coping with Long COVID? How can employers and unions cooperate to accommodate individuals with multiple chemical scent sensitivities?\n\nBreak 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nPanel 4 - Fluctuations and Flare-Ups: Practical guidance on accommodating episodic disabilities in the workplaces 2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. ET\nFluctuations and Flare-Ups: Practical guidance on accommodating episodic disabilities in the workplace\n\n\n \nMelissa Egan\nLead Episodic Disabilities\nRealize Canada\n\n\n \nShibil Siddiqi\nEmployer Counsel\nProgressive Barristers \n\n\n \nSheilagh Turkington\nUnion Counsel\nCavalluzzo \n\n\nEmployees experiencing episodic disabilities often experience fluctuations in wellness\, which may lead to a decline in workplace performance and increased absenteeism. In this panel\, experts will explore accommodation procedures for employees with episodic disabilities. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat questions are appropriate regarding an employee’s episodic disability? When do requests for medical information amount to discrimination or harassment?\nCan an employer inquire into whether an employee’s atypical workplace behaviours or schedules are related to the employee’s episodic disability?\nIs an employer entitled to request medical information from an employee on an ongoing basis? How can an employer balance its interest in requesting medical information with an employee’s right to privacy?\nWhat steps must unions take to satisfy their duty of fair representation for members with episodic disabilities?\nIn what circumstances have arbitrators or judges found that employers or unions have not met their duty to accommodate?\nWhat are best practices in accommodating an employee who requires modified work?\nWhat steps should an employer take when accommodating and communicating with an employee returning from disability leave?\nWhat proactive policies should employers and unions develop to meet the duty to accommodate?\n\nDay 1 closing remarks 4:30 p.m. – 4:35 p.m. ET \nTuesday\, April 18\, 2023Breakfast and Registration – 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs – 9:00 a.m. – 9:10 a.m. \nPanel 5 - Promoting Workplace Equity: Removing barriers\, promoting inclusion\, and identifying the promise and perils of big data\n9:10 a.m. – 10:25 a.m. ET\nPromoting Workplace Equity: Removing barriers\, promoting inclusion\, and identifying the promise and perils of big data\n\n\n \nPriya Sarin\nEmployer Counsel\nSherrard Kuzz \n\n\n \nAkilah Haneef-Jabari\nAnti-Racism Advisor\nConsultant and Trainer\nJabari Community Services \n\n\n \nBrendan McCutchen\nUnion Counsel\nWright Henry \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\, expert panelists will offer attendees practical guidance on topical issues including the value of anti-racist approaches\, improving equity in recruitment and retention (and the related role of preferential equity programs)\, the practical impacts of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs)\, and the promises and perils of disaggregated data and artificial intelligence in advancing workplace equity. \nBreak 10:25 a.m. – 10:40 a.m. ET \nPanel 6 - Is Privacy a Human Right? The evolution of Code-based rights in a technological world 10:40 a.m. - 11:55 a.m. ET\nIs Privacy a Human Right? The evolution of Code-based rights in a technological world\n\n\n \nNisha Dhanoa\nEmployer Counsel\nHunter Liberatore Law \n\n\n \nDanielle Bisnar\nUnion Counsel\nCavalluzzo \n\n\nShould employee privacy be recognized as a human right in response to evolving monitoring technologies? In this panel\, experts will discuss best practices in balancing employee privacy and modern technologies in the workplace. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat changes does the federal Digital Charter Implementation Act\, 2022 (Bill C-27) propose regarding workplace electronic monitoring? How do these provisions in the proposed Act differ from the current Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and related provincial legislation?\nWhat consequences do monitoring technologies pose for employees’ privacy and human rights? What specific considerations do these technologies raise for remote workers?\nWhat key issues should employers and unions address in policies or collective agreement provisions governing employee privacy for in-person\, hybrid\, and remote workers?\nWhat suite of off-duty privacy rights and protections does an employee enjoy\, if any? What privacy rights\, if any\, are available to job applicants?\nWhat are best practices in soliciting employee consent to digital surveillance measures?\nWhat are best practices in tracking\, compiling\, and retaining employee information? How about job applicant information?\nHow have arbitral attitudes towards workplace privacy measures evolved in response to monitoring technologies?\n\nLunch 11:55 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. \nPanel 7 - Off the Clock Conduct: Balancing employee beliefs and actions with maintaining a respectful workplace 1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. ET\nOff the Clock Conduct: Balancing employee beliefs and actions with maintaining a respectful workplace\n\n\n \nPatricia D’Heureux\nUnion Counsel\nCavalluzzo \n\n\n \nDr. Faisal Bhabha\nOsgoode Hall Law School\,\nYork University \n\n\n \nCarla Black\nEmployer Counsel\nRae Christen Jeffries \n\n\nEmployees with differing perspectives and beliefs nonetheless need to work collegially in the workplace. In this panel\, experts will examine the responsibilities of an employer and union in ensuring appropriate employee conduct\, both inside and outside the workplace. Topics to be addressed include: \n\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions to balance an employee’s Charter rights and freedom of expression with a workplace that remains free from discrimination and harassment?\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions in preventing workplace bullying and harassment? Should workplace training include off-duty conduct?\nHow can employers and unions best respond to problematic employee behaviour in a virtual working environment?\nCan an employer limit an employee’s political speech at work? What constitutes political speech?\nCan an employee face discipline for verbal statements\, online commentary\, or conduct outside of work hours? Is an employer justified in disciplining an employee whose off-duty conduct reflects that employee’s workplace behaviours?\nDoes an employer\, union\, or employee have a duty to report a controversial online statement by another employee?\nWhat are the duties of a union in representing members facing consequences from expressing unpopular beliefs or opinions in the workplace? Is the union’s duty different if the member is being disciplined for expressions or comments made outside the workplace or online?\nWhat are best practices for unions and employers where an employee or member alleges that workplace management has engaged in inappropriate or controversial comments or behaviours? Is a different duty owed when the conduct occurs outside the workplace or online?\n\nBreak 2:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. \nPanel 8 - Seeking the Antidote: Identifying and repairing poisoned workplaces2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. ET\nSeeking the Antidote: Identifying and repairing poisoned workplaces\n\n\n \nElana Fleischmann\nMediator/Workplace Restoration Expert \n\n\n \nOzlem Yucel\nEmployer Counsel\nTurnpenney Milne LLP \n\n\n \nPaul Champ\nUnion Counsel\nChamp Law \n\n\nAs codified in the Ontario Human Rights Code\, employers must ensure that a workplace is free from discrimination and/or harassment. While poisoned workplaces are not directly defined under the Code\, these topics do include poisoned work environments involving personal harassment. In this panel\, experts will examine employer and union responsibilities in identifying and repairing poisoned workplaces. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nHow have adjudicators differentiated between personality conflicts and a poisoned workplace? Do an employee’s perceptions factor into this assessment?\nDoes “workplace culture” excuse conduct that would otherwise be considered poisonous? What role\, if any\, does a workplace harassment policy play in making this determination?\nWhat types of behaviour may constitute subtle forms of a poisoned workplace? What signs may indicate that someone is experiencing unreported harassment or bullying?\nWhat actions and restorative approaches should unions and employers take when an employee raises allegations of a poisoned environment? Is the intent to poison relevant when assessing disciplinary actions?\nWhat management styles or behaviours have adjudicators identified as harassment or bullying?\nHow have remote environments changed the prevailing understanding of poisoned workplaces? What strategies can employers and unions implement to respond to problematic behaviour in virtual spaces?\nWhat support can unions provide to members affected by a poisoned workplace?\nWhat steps should employers and unions take to create a safe and respectful workplace?\n\nEnd of day 2 – 3:45 p.m. \nConference CPD\n\n\nThis program has been approved for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\n\n\n\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\n\n\n\n \n\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider this program for 10 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of Ontario may consider counting this program for 10 substantive hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/toronto-human-rights-and-accommodation-conference/
LOCATION:Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel\, 123 Queen Street West\, Toronto\, Ontario\, M5H 3M9 Most popular places at this add\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Human Rights & Accommodation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/toronto-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230412T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230413T151500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071621
CREATED:20230317T015303Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230405T231255Z
UID:6327-1681302600-1681398900@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:National Pensions Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nRoss Gascho\nPensions Counsel\nFasken \n\n\n \nBalraj Dosanjh\nPensions Counsel\nCavalluzzo LLP \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nLesha Van Der Bij\nChief Operating Officer and Founder\nOptimize Legal \n\n\n \nLiz Doughty\nChief Executive Officer Special Forces\nPension Plan Corporation \n\n\n \nGary Yee\nNational Representative – Pension & Airline Coordinator\nCanadian Union of Public Employees \n\n\n \nRandy Bauslaugh\nPensions & Benefits Counsel\nBauslaugh Law \n\n\nWednesday\, April 12\, 2023Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs 12:30 p.m. – 12:35 p.m. ET \nPanel 1 - Pension Fund Forecasts: Expert insights into recent trends\, including the impact of inflation12:35 p.m. – 1:50 p.m. ET\nPension Fund Forecasts: Expert insights into recent trends\, including the impact of inflation\n\n\n \nMary Kate Archibald\nPrincipal\nEckler Ltd. \n\n\n \nAaron Bennett\nCIO\nUniversity Pension Plan \n\n\nCanada and other major economies are currently confronted with the highest levels of inflation since the 1980s. Persistent above-target inflation affects the pension industry in myriad ways\, including through upward pressure on interest rates\, lower liabilities for defined benefit plans\, and decreasing returns in the bond markets. Inflation also affects the retirement income security of pension plan members. The risk of a recession in 2023 looms large\, as any recession would affect both plan returns and the insolvency risk of sponsoring employers. \nIn this session\, leading experts will explore the challenges posed by the current and predicted economic climate\, and address the following topics: \n\nWhat are the latest economic forecasts\, including the outlook for inflation\, interest rates\, unemployment\, and growth?\nWhat challenges does inflation pose for pension plan administrators generally?\nHow do the current economic conditions affect different types of pension plans and their members (e.g.\, defined benefit vs. defined contribution; public sector vs. private sector)? What are the implications of any divergence in these effects?\nWhat strategies can pension plan administrators take to manage pension plans and pension plan investments in an economic downturn? What role do administrators’ statutory and fiduciary obligations play in this regard?\nWhat have governments and regulators done to assist pension plans and their members in coping with the current economic conditions? What more can be done?\n\nBreak 1:50 p.m. – 1:55 p.m. ET \nPanel 2 - Keeping Posted on Pensions: A review of recent caselaw1:55 p.m. - 3:10 a.m. ET\nKeeping Posted on Pensions: A review of recent caselaw\n\n\n \nLesha Van Der Bij\nChief Operating Officer and Founder\nOptimize Legal \n\n\n \nMichael Wolpert\nPensions counsel\nFasken \n\n\n \nBettina Quistgaard\nUnion counsel\nPink Larkin \n\n\nThis panel explores significant court and tribunal decisions related to pensions. Topics to be addressed include plan amendments\, collective bargaining\, recovery of overpayments\, fiduciary duties\, shared risk plans\, family law\, surplus on wind-up\, and survivor benefits. Final selection of cases will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important decisions.Break 3:10 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. ET \nPanel 3 - Proposed\, Pending\, Passed: An update on key developments in legislation and regulations3:15 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. PST\nProposed\, Pending\, Passed: An update on key developments in legislation and regulations\n\n\n \nPamela Odina\nPensions Counsel\nBrown Mills Klinck Prezioso LLP \n\n\n \nDavid Blair\nUnion Counsel\nVictory Square Law Office \n\n\nIn this session\, experts will review recent legislative and regulatory pension developments. Topics to be addressed include insolvency\, ESG (environmental\, social\, and governance) factors\, climate change risk\, borrowing by pension plans\, leverage\, correction of contribution errors\, defined benefit pension plan funding\, target benefit plans\, cyber risks\, and unclaimed property. The panel will discuss amendments to the federal Income Tax Act and to provincial pension legislation\, including in Saskatchewan and British Columbia\, as well as Bill C-228\, the proposed federal Pension Protection Act. Experts will explore draft regulatory guidance released recently by the Office for the Superintendent of Financial Institutions\, the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario\, and the Canadian Association of Pension Supervisory Authorities. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important legislative and regulatory developments.Day 1 closing remarks 4:30 p.m. – 4:35 p.m. ET \nThursday\, April 13Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs 12:30 p.m. – 12:35 p.m. ET \nPanel 4 - Going Green? Examining the evolving role of ESG approaches in pension planning and management12:35 p.m. - 1:50 p.m. ET\nPromoting Workplace Equity: Removing barriers\, promoting inclusion\, and identifying the promise and perils of big data\n\n\n \nChristie Stephenson\nExecutive Director\, Peter Dhillon Centre for Business Ethics\nUBC Sauder School of Business \n\n\n \nMurray Gold\nPensions Counsel\nKoskie Minsky \n\n\n \nRandy Bauslaugh\nPensions & Benefits Counsel\nBauslaugh Law \n\n\nEnvironmental\, social\, and governance (ESG) considerations have taken on heightened importance for pension plan sponsors and administrators. Recent international climate change conferences (COP26 and COP27) have committed national governments to climate-related actions including increasingly aggressive emissions reduction targets. At the same time\, environmental and social activism continues to place pressure on pension plan fiduciaries and other institutional investors to give greater weight to ESG factors in their decision-making. \nThe experts on this panel will consider the myriad challenges and opportunities presented by the evolving relationship between pension plans and ESG considerations\, addressing questions that include the following: \n\nHow has the national and global context relating to climate change evolved since the 2015 Paris Climate Accord? How have pension plan sponsors and administrators responded?\nTo what extent do pension plan administrators’ common law fiduciary duties require them to factor ESG considerations into their investment-related decision-making? Do those duties permit administrators to take ESG considerations into account for any purpose other than financial gain? Does the answer depend on plan terms or type of plan?\nHow have recent decisions from other jurisdictions addressed pension fiduciaries’ responsibilities in respect of ESG considerations?\nWhat are the current legislative and regulatory requirements regarding ESG disclosure\, and taking into account ESG considerations\, across Canadian jurisdictions? What changes are in prospect?\nWhat level of familiarity should pension plan board members have with ESG-related issues?\nWhat weight\, if any\, should be given to the views of pension plan members regarding the content of the plan’s investments? Is there scope for increasing activism by individuals or groups to force change in this regard?\n\nBreak 1:50 p.m. – 1:55 p.m. ET \nPanel 5 - Locking in Privacy Protections: Requirements and best practices for cybersecurity in pension administration1:55 p.m. – 3:10 p.m. ET\nLocking in Privacy Protections: Requirements and best practices for cybersecurity in pension administration\n\n\nEvan Howard\nChief Legal & Regulatory Affairs Officer\nCAAT Pension Plan\n\nDavid Bartucci\nHead Stakeholder Relations and Special Projects Pensions Financial Services\nRegulatory Authority of Ontario\n\nBenjamin Fung\nCanada Research Chair in Data Mining for Cybersecurity and School of Information Studies Professor\nMcGill University\n\nMichelle Desnoyers\nCorporate Information Security Officer\nAlberta Pensions Services Corporation\n\nPension plan administrators are major custodians of personal and financial information. As plans’ reliance on information technology (IT) infrastructure to store member data and process transactions increases\, so do the risks relating to cybersecurity. A cybersecurity incident affecting a pension plan has the potential to inflict significant legal and reputational consequences. More broadly\, regulators across Canada have signalled that administrators must actively monitor and manage cybersecurity risks. \nThis panel will examine the legal landscape on cybersecurity and propose strategies for assessing and mitigating cybersecurity risk. Questions to be addressed include the following: \n\nHow do pension plan administrators’ fiduciary duties interact with cybersecurity concerns? To what extent does pension benefits legislation impose additional requirements relating to cybersecurity?\nWhat bearing do federal and provincial privacy statutes have on plan administrators’ obligations in relation to cybersecurity risk? What impact would administrators face following from the proposed federal Digital Charter Implementation Act\, 2022?\nWhat regulatory guidance has been issued to date regarding cybersecurity for pension plans? What developments are on the horizon?\nHow should a prudent pension plan administrator assess a plan’s cybersecurity risk? From a governance perspective\, what governance policies and processes should be established to help manage this risk?\nWhat steps must a pension plan administrator take following a cybersecurity incident?\n\nDay 2 closing remarks – 3:10 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. ET \nCPDThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 6.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/national-pensions-conference/
LOCATION:Virtual Event
CATEGORIES:Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/national-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20230327T080000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20230329T154500
DTSTAMP:20260611T071621
CREATED:20230301T231918Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240723T152331Z
UID:5849-1679904000-1680104700@lancasterhouse.com
SUMMARY:Vancouver Human Rights and Accommodation Conference
DESCRIPTION:Conference Co-Chairs\n\n \nJessica Gregory\nArbitrator/Mediator \n\n\n \nNatasha Jategaonkar\nEmployer Counsel\nMathews\, Dinsdale & Clark \n\n\n \nHasan Alam\nStaff Lawyer\nB.C. General Employees’ Union \n\n\nConference Advisory Committee\n\n \nRyan Goldvine\nMediator/Arbitrator\nGoldvine Dispute Resolution Services \n\n\n \nLaura Track\nHuman Rights Clinic Director and Director of Public Legal Education\nCommunity Legal Assistance Society \n\n\n \nKristen Woo\nLegal Counsel\nBritish Columbia Public School Employers’ Association \n\n\n \nJeff A. Bastien\nEmployer Counsel\nDentons \n\n\n \nAngela Wong\nCounsel\nHospital Employees’ Union \n\n\n \nDal Benning\nGeneral Vice-President\nCUPE BC \n\n\nMonday\, March 27\, 2023Breakfast and Registration 8:00 AM – 9:00 AM PST\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs 9:00 AM – 9:10 AM PST \n Pre-Conference Workshop - Difficult Accommodations: Responding to denial\, defensiveness\, and personality disorders\n9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. PST\nDifficult Accommodations: Responding to denial\, defensiveness\, and personality disorders\n\n\nMegan Ashbury\nArbitrator\, Mediator and Workplace Investigator\n\nDr. Izabela Schultz\nCortex Centre for Advanced Assessment\n\nMelissa VanderHouwen\nUnion Cousel\nMoore Edgar Lyster LLP\n\nVeronica Ukrainetz\nEmployer Counsel\nUkrainetz Workplace Law Group\n\nAccommodating an employee with a disability can become difficult when the employee’s disability affects the employee’s judgment\, perceptions\, and ability to cooperate. Unfortunately\, mental health disabilities\, including mood disorders\, can often affect precisely those faculties that they require to participate in the accommodation process. Accommodating neurodivergent employees can also prove difficult to employer and union representatives unaccustomed to the differences in communication and social behaviour characteristic of autism spectrum disorders. \nWorking through interactive exercises and realistic scenarios with the guidance of experts\, participants will develop the knowledge and skills necessary to: \nAppreciate how common disabilities may affect a worker’s ability to participate in the accommodation process\nCommunicate effectively with defensive workers and those in denial\nFulfil union and management legal obligations when workers are unwilling or unable to participate in the accommodation process\nIdentify when the point of undue hardship in reached \nTuesday\, March 28\, 2023Breakfast and Registration 8:00 AM – 9:00 AM PST\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs 9:00 AM – 9:10 AM PST \nPanel 1 - Human Rights Headlines: The latest caselaw and legislative developments\n9:15 a.m. – 10:40 a.m. PST\nHuman Rights Headlines: The latest caselaw and legislative developments\n\n\nJessica Derynck\nMember\nBC Human Rights Tribunal\n\nShirin Kiamanesh\nUnion Counsel\nKoskie Glavin Gordon\n\nJames Kondopulos\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell LLP\n\nIn this session\, experts will review the most important legal developments of the past year\, flagging significant litigation and legislative reform. Topics to be addressed include workplace discrimination and harassment\, substance use\, and requests for accommodation. Other updates to be discussed include the introduction of the Indigenous Self-Government in Child and Family Services Amendment Act and the Anti-Racism Data Act\, in addition to relevant changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act. Final selection of topics will take place in the weeks leading up to the conference\, ensuring coverage of the latest and most important developments. \nBreak 10:40 AM – 10:55 AM PST \nPanel 2 - A Legislative Milestone: The addition of Indigenous Identity to the BC Human Rights Code\n10:55 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. PST\nA Legislative Milestone: The addition of Indigenous Identity to the BC Human Rights Code\n\n\nPatricia Barkaskas\nStrategic Advisor to the Dean for the National Centre for Indigenous Laws\nUniversity of Victoria\n\nShelley Saje Ricci\nCanadian Union of Public Employees\n\nJoshua Sutherland\nEmployer Counsel\nHarris & Company LLP\n\nIndigenous identity is now a ground protected from discrimination in the B.C. Human Rights Code. In this session\, experts will closely examine the history\, significance\, and ramifications of this development\, including the ways in which it advances reconciliation in the province. \nNetworking Lunch 11:45 AM – 1:00 PM PST \nPanel 3 - Disabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions\n1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. PST\nDisabilities That Elude Diagnosis: Accommodating employees with Long COVID\, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome\, and other poorly understood conditions\n\n\nWolfgang Zimmermann\nPresident\, Pacific Coast University for Workplace Health Sciences Executive Director\,\nNational Institute of Disability Management and Research\n\nJodie Gauthier\nUnion Counsel\,\nBlack Gropper\n\nJodie Gauthier\nEmployer Counsel\nRoper Greyell\n\nWorkplace parties are familiar with applying principles regarding the duty to accommodate in cases of visible disabilities\, well-known conditions\, or conditions for which there exists a clear diagnostic test. However\, challenges often arise when an employee seeks accommodation for a condition that eludes diagnosis. In this session\, experts will address 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 this list?\nWhat medical evidence is an employer legally permitted to request in order to establish an employee’s right to accommodation in such cases? Is a definitive diagnosis\, or “objective evidence\,” necessary to establish an invisible disability?\nHow can employers and unions effectively formulate requests for medical information in cases where an employee’s condition cannot be confirmed using an objective diagnostic test? What types of information should employees request from doctors in such cases?\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 malingering? When will an employer be justified in seeking further information\, including a specialist’s report or an independent medical examination?\nHow do the stereotypes and stigmas associated with these medical conditions contribute to the challenge of providing accommodation?\nHow might eligibility requirements for short- and long-term disability insurance programs pose additional complications in such cases? Where an employee has been denied disability benefits\, and that denial is later held to be improper\, which party will be liable for the denial?\nWhat types of accommodations may be of assistance to an employee suffering from persistent symptoms such as pain\, fatigue\, or cognitive difficulties? For example: What will help individuals coping with Long COVID? How can employers and unions cooperate to accommodate individuals with multiple chemical scent sensitivities?\n\nBreak 2:15 PM – 2:30 PM PST \nPanel 4 - Fluctuations and Flare-Ups: Practical guidance on accommodating episodic disabilities in the workplace\n2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. PST\nFluctuations and Flare-Ups: Practical guidance on accommodating episodic disabilities in the workplace\n\n\nDr. Renée-Louise Franche\nClinical psychologist\, Consultant in\nWork Ability Promotion and Organizational Health\n\nLani deHek\nManager\, Disability Management & Health and Safety\nBC Nurses’ Union\n\nJackie Davie\nAssociate Director\, Wellness & Recovery Office\nSimon Fraser University\n\nEmployees living with episodic disabilities often experience fluctuations in wellness\, which may lead to a decline in workplace performance and increased absenteeism. In this panel\, experts will explore accommodation procedures for employees with episodic disabilities. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat questions are appropriate regarding an employee’s episodic disability? When do requests for medical information amount to discrimination or harassment?\nCan an employer inquire into whether an employee’s atypical workplace behaviours or schedules are related to the employee’s episodic disability?\nIs an employer entitled to request medical information from an employee on an ongoing basis? How can an employer balance its interest in requesting medical information with an employee’s right to privacy?\nWhat steps must unions take to satisfy their duty of fair representation for members with episodic disabilities?\nIn what circumstances have arbitrators or judges found that employers or unions have not met their duty to accommodate?\nWhat are best practices in accommodating an employee who requires modified work?\nWhat steps should an employer take when accommodating and communicating with an employee returning from disability leave?\nWhat proactive policies should employers and unions develop to meet their duties to accommodate?\n\nNetworking Reception 3:45 PM – 5:00 PM PST \nWednesday\, March 29\, 2023Breakfast and Registration 8:00 AM – 9:00 AM PST\nIntroductory remarks by Co-Chairs 9:00 AM – 9:10 AM PST \nPanel 5 - Investigations under the Magnifying Glass: A close look at significant developments\n9:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. PST\nInvestigations under the Magnifying Glass: A close look at significant developments\n\n\nTonie Beharrell\nLawyer and Workplace Investigator\nSouthern Butler Price LLP\n\nMenachem Freedman\nUnion Counsel\nHHGB Lawyers\n\nVictoria Merritt\nEmployer Counsel\nDentons\n\nWorkplace investigators often grapple with issues of bias\, fact-finding\, and confidentiality that may emerge during an investigation. In this session\, experts will discuss important developments in this area\, in addition to practices and policies that safeguard fair and effective investigations: \n\nWhat lessons can be drawn from recent cases about the scope of an employer’s investigation\, taking into account the need to preserve a fair\, adequate\, and effective investigation process?\nWhat are the most crucial components of an anti-harassment policy? How can an organization adequately monitor its policies for effectiveness?\nHow do unconscious and implicit biases impact human rights investigations in the workplace? And what can be done to avoid them?\nHow can investigators\, in the fact-finding and report-writing process\, address pervasive systemic discrimination in the workplace?\nHow does adopting a trauma-informed approach to conducting witness interviews affect the efficacy of the investigation?\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?\nTo what extent is diligent reporting and record-keeping essential for an investigation? What are best practices for drafting investigation reports?\n\nBreak 10:30 AM – 10:45 AM PST \nPanel 6 - Promoting Workplace Equity: Removing barriers\, promoting inclusion\, and identifying the promise and perils of big data\n10:45 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. PST\nPromoting Workplace Equity: Removing barriers\, promoting inclusion\, and identifying the promise and perils of big data\n\n\nKoml Kandola\nArbitrator and Mediator\n\nEarl Moloney\nStaff Representative\nB.C. General Employees’ Union\n\nJessica Fairbairn\nEmployer Counsel\nHarris & Company LLP\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\, expert panelists will offer attendees practical guidance on topical issues including the value of anti-racist approaches\, improving equity in recruitment and retention (and the related role of preferential equity programs)\, the practical impacts of non-disclosure agreements\, and the promises and perils of disaggregated data and artificial intelligence in advancing workplace equity. \nNetworking Lunch 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM PST \nPanel 7 - Off-the-Clock Conduct: Balancing employee beliefs and actions with maintaining a respectful workplace\n1:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. PST\nOff-the-Clock Conduct: Balancing employee beliefs and actions with maintaining a respectful workplace\n\n\nLindsay Waddell\nUnion counsel\nMoore Edgar Lyster LLP\n\nDonovan Plomp\nEmployer Counsel\nMcCarthy Tétrault\n\nEmployees with differing perspectives and beliefs nonetheless need to work collegially in the workplace. In this panel\, experts will examine the responsibilities of an employer and union in ensuring appropriate employee conduct\, both inside and outside the workplace. Topics to be addressed include: \n\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions to balance an employee’s Charter rights and freedom of expression with a workplace that remains free from discrimination and harassment?\nWhat are best practices for employers and unions in preventing workplace bullying and harassment? Should workplace training include off-duty conduct?\nHow can employers and unions best respond to problematic employee behaviour in a virtual working environment?\nCan an employer limit an employee’s political speech at work? What constitutes political speech?\nCan an employee face discipline for verbal statements\, online commentary\, or conduct outside of work hours? Is an employer justified in disciplining an employee whose off-duty conduct reflects that employee’s workplace behaviours?\nDoes an employer\, union\, or employee have a duty to report a controversial online statement by another employee? How relevant is the “location” of the statement\, i.e. the online platform where the statement is made?\nWhat are the duties of a union in representing members facing consequences from expressing unpopular beliefs or opinions in the workplace? Is the union’s duty different if the member is being disciplined for expressions or comments made outside the workplace or online?\nWhat are best practices for unions and employers where an employee or member alleges that workplace management has engaged in inappropriate or controversial comments or behaviours? Is a different duty owed when the conduct occurs outside the workplace or online?\n\nBreak 2:15 PM – 2:30 PM PST \nPanel 8 - Is Privacy a Human Right? The evolution of Code-based rights in a technological world\n2:30 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. PST\nIs Privacy a Human Right? The evolution of Code-based rights in a technological world\n\n\nJeanette Van Den Bulk\nDeputy Commissioner\nOffice of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia\n\nStefanie Ratjen\nStaff Representative\, Advocacy\nBC General Employees’ Union\n\nPreston Parsons\nOverholt LLP\n\nShould employee privacy be recognized as a human right in response to evolving monitoring technologies? In this panel\, experts will discuss best practices in balancing employee privacy with the prevalence of modern technologies in the workplace. Specifically\, panelists will address: \n\nWhat changes does the federal Digital Charter Implementation Act\, 2022 (Bill C-27) propose regarding workplace electronic monitoring? How do these provisions in the proposed Act differ from the current Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and related provincial legislation?\nWhat consequences do monitoring technologies pose for employees’ privacy and human rights? What specific considerations do these technologies raise for remote workers?\nWhat key issues should employers and unions address in policies or collective agreement provisions governing employee privacy for in-person\, hybrid\, and remote workers?\nWhat suite of off-duty privacy rights and protections does an employee enjoy\, if any? What privacy rights\, if any\, are available to job applicants?\nWhat are best practices in soliciting employee consent to digital surveillance measures?\nWhat are best practices in tracking\, compiling\, and retaining employee information? How about job applicant information?\nHow have arbitral attitudes towards workplace privacy measures evolved in response to monitoring technologies?\n\nEnd of Conference 3:45 PM \nVancouver HRA Conference CPD\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\nMembers of the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society may consider counting this program for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nMembers of the Law Society of New Brunswick may consider counting this program for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours per session.\nThis program has been approved by CPHR BC & Yukon for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours under Section A3 of the Recertification Log of the Human Resource Professionals Association.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 9.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\nVancouver HRA Workshop CPD\n\nThis program has been approved by CPHR Alberta for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\n\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 counting this program for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours per session.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of British Colombia for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.\nThis program has been approved by the Law Society of Saskatchewan for 5.5 Continuing Professional Development hours.
URL:https://lancasterhouse.com/event/vancouver-human-rights-and-accommodation-conference/
LOCATION:The Hyatt Regency Vancouver\, 655 Burrard Street.\, Vancouver\, B.C.\, Canada
CATEGORIES:Conference,Human Rights & Accommodation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://lancasterhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/header/Vancouver-header.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR