It is no secret – many employers are looking for ways to keep up with the mounting expense of post-retirement benefits. As a result, some employers may attempt to unilaterally amend or terminate benefits to their retirees, relying on “reservation of rights clauses” commonly found in employment contracts (e.g. the employer reserves the right to amend, modify, suspend or terminate any of the benefit programs at any time).
On December 4, 2013, the Minister of Industry, James Moore announced that Canada’s anti-spam law (the “Act”) will begin to take effect on July 1, 2014. This announcement has arrived nearly 3 years after the Act received royal assent. The finalization of the regulations under the Act triggered Mr. Moore’s announcement.
On December 13, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified that pension benefits, regardless of the type of pension plan, are not deductible from wrongful dismissal damages: IBM Canada Limited v. Waterman, 2013 SCC 70.
In MacBurnie v. Halterm Container Terminal Limited Partnership, 2013 NSSC 361 (November 8, 2013), just cause for termination was found by the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in a case involving an employee of 22 years.
Deol v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 1147 (Judgment: November 12, 2013), Zinn J.
Mr. Deol’s application for permanent residence under the Manitoba Provincial Nominee Program as a skilled worker was denied on the basis that he had misrepresented or withheld material facts relating to his employment that could induce an error in the administration of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (“Act”), contrary to subsection 40(1)(a) of the Act.
On December 18, 2013, Citizenship and Immigration Canada issued a news release stating, “Application forms, guides and information on how to apply to the new Parents and Grandparents program will be made available online on December 31, 2013, just ahead of the Parents and Grandparents program re-opening.”
The Employment Standards Act (“ESA”) sets minimum rights and responsibilities for all provincially regulated employers and employees in the Province of New Brunswick. The ESA regulates minimum wages, vacation pay, public holiday pay, leave, etc. If an employer violates an employee’s rights under the ESA, the employer may be ordered to comply with provisions of the ESA and/or to compensate the employee for amounts owed to them under the ESA.
In its decision in Amaratunga v Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (“NAFO”), 2013 SCC 66, released on November 29th, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) confirmed that international organizations operating in Canada may enjoy immunity from certain Canadian laws, including wrongful dismissal actions by senior employees. NAFO is an international organization with its headquarters located in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. NAFO’s objective is to contribute through consultation and cooperation to the optimum utilization, rational management and conservation of the fishery resources of the NAFO Convention Area.
On December 13, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) will hear the appeal of Michael McCormick, equity partner at the respondent law firm, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP. McCormick has appealed the decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCA)1 to Canada’s highest court, which held that the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear his age discrimination complaint. The BCCA found that since there was no relationship of “employment” between McCormick, an equity partner, and his law firm, his discrimination complaint could not be heard. For McCormick and other complainants like him, unless the alleged discrimination occurred in the area of “employment” (or another applicable area under the Act), a remedy cannot be obtained under the human rights legislation.
If an employee negotiates a termination package with an employer but does not sign a release, can they successfully claim additional pay in lieu of notice in a court action? Interestingly, the Ontario Superior Court recently held that the answer for one employee in these circumstances was “no”.