Canadian Employment Law Today

October 9, 2019

Focuses on human resources law from a business perspective, featuring news and cases from the courts, in-depth articles on legal trends and insights from top employment lawyers across Canada.

Issue link: http://digital.hrreporter.com/i/1171340

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 0 of 7

PM41261516 Emplo y ment Law Today Canadian www.employmentlawtoday.com Ontario worker overzealous in harassment complaint, work refusal pg. 4 Accidental physical conduct by and brief encounter with supervisor not proof worker faced dangerous condition in the workplace Ontario worker on sick leave with no return date wrongfully dismissed Employer wanted more medical information and co-operation BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ONTARIO employer should have made more of an effort to engage with a worker on sick leave who rejected return-to-work options and didn't provide additional medical information before he was terminated, the Ontario Superior Court of Jus- tice has ruled. Vimay Nagpal began working for IBM in the United Kingdom in 1988. In 1989, Nagpal moved to Canada and transferred to IBM Canada, reach- ing senior management status several years later. In 2011, Nagpal successfully applied for a lead- ership position overseeing two new software projects. He started in the new position in Janu- ary 2012, but soon had difficulties with the team, which he believed was due mainly to one particu- larly challenging employee. Nagpal tried to get support from his supervisor in dealing with the problem employee, but he didn't feel that his su- pervisor had his back. He explained that these dif- ficulties were causing him stress and mental health issues, but the supervisor didn't follow up. One year into his stint in the position — in Janu- ary 2013 — Nagpal's supervisor gave him a poor performance evaluation. On March 14, 2013, Nag- pal called in sick due to stress. He remained off work for a few days and, on March 19, Nagpal told IBM that his doctor had recommended he take six weeks off. Worker reinstated after post-jury duty firing Worker's failure to keep employer informed of jury duty dates during trial stemmed from stress, not dishonest intentions: arbitrator BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ONTARIO worker who breached his employer's rules on reporting in during jury duty deserved serious discipline but not dis- missal, as his misconduct was caused more by mental health issues than fraudulent in- tent, an arbitrator has ruled. e worker was employed as a caseworker in the Toronto Employment and Social Ser- vices Division with 24 years of service and no discipline on his record. In February 2014, the worker was selected to serve on the jury of a high-profile murder trial and it was ex- pected to take several months. e collective agreement between the worker's union and the city required the city to give employees a paid leave of absence while they were on jury duty. Employees October 9, 2019 Dismissal a damaging blow to articling student pg. 3 Vancouver law firm ordered to pay $50,000 in aggravated damages for abrupt and bad-faith dismissal WORKER NOT on page 6 » CREDIT: JASONDOIY/iSTOCK EMPLOYEE on page 7 » with Colin Gibson Ask the Expert pg. 2 Micromanagement: Can it be bullying and harassment?

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - October 9, 2019