Canadian Employment Law Today

February 26, 2020

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/1210746

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 0 of 7

PM41261516 Emplo y ment Law Today Canadian www.employmentlawtoday.com Cannabis in the workplace: zero tolerance PG. 4 Does a zero-tolerance policy make sense for employers? A manager by any other name Manitoba bus company manager had her role reduced, but she still performed management functions that exempted her from OT pay BY JEFFREY R. SMITH THE CO-FOUNDER of a Manitoba bus tour com- pany saw her role and influence gradually reduced, but her position overseeing the day-to-day operation of the company still involved management functions that exempted her from any entitlement to overtime pay under the Canada Labour Code, an adjudicator has ruled. Maisie Hicks was a bus driver in 2011 when she met Walt Morris, the owner of a group of compa - nies called the Morris Group. They decided to start a Winnipeg-based bus tour company together and, after the company was incorporated in January 2012 as Winnipeg Exclusive Bus Tours (EBT), Hicks left her bus driver job to work with the new company as the general manager. She was responsible for managing all the company's departments and all the staff re - ported to her including office staff, accounting, the dispatcher and the fixed operations manager. She reported to Morris, who, through the Morris Group, provided money to develop the business. Hicks had provided $3,000 toward the initial startup cost, but Morris provided the rest. The company grew over the next four years and, in April 2016, Morris brought in his brother Wade to be the vice-president of the Morris Group and Hicks reported to him as well. Wade Morris had no back - Saving clause to the rescue? Ontario court decision shows that employers should rely on sound drafting of their employment agreements first BY MATTHEW TOMM THE ONTARIO Court of Appeal has dealt a significant blow to the utility of "saving clauses" to salvage drafting errors when the termination provision of an employment contract is not compliant with employment standards legislation. Rossman v. Canadian Solar Inc. confirms that there is no substitute for the proper drafting of employment contracts. The employee, Noah Rossman, was hired in May 2010. His employment contract contained the following termination clause: "…. this agreement may be terminated … on giving the employee written notice [or pay in lieu] for a period which is the greater of: (i) 2 weeks, or (ii) In accordance with the provisions of the Employment Standards Act (Ontario) or other applicable legislation. … Benefits shall cease 4 weeks from the written notice. " The court held that the clause was unen - forceable for being inconsistent with Ontario's February 26, 2020 Requirement for lengthy notice of resignation enforceable: court PG.3 New Brunswick vet's contract required 120 days' notice of resignation from position that was difficult to replace MANY EMPLOYEES on page 6 » CREDIT: RAWPIXEL.COM SHUTTERSTOCK DISTINCTION on page 7 » with Leah Schatz Ask an Expert PG. 2 Increased workloads and mental stress

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - February 26, 2020