Canadian Employment Law Today

June 30, 2021

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:

Contents of this Issue


Page 0 of 7

PM41261516 B.C. worker gets $500,000 for family status discrimination PG.4 Employer spent three years providing inadequate accommodation options to single father and then stopped trying when agreement fell through A BRITISH Columbia worker is entitled to five months' reasonable notice, not the 13 months he claimed by exaggerating his role with his former employer, the B.C. Supreme Court has ruled. Kartners Bathroom Accessories is a supplier of bathroom products to individuals, builders, and ho - tels. It's a small company that started in 2010. In Oc- tober 2013, Jose Adriano, 54, applied for a part-time bookkeeper position, highlighting his experience as a finance and administration officer in his native Philippines as well as his commerce degree earned there. He also worked in bookkeeping and office ad - ministration after he moved to Canada in 2010. Kartners hired Adriano as an independent contrac- tor on Oct. 23, 2013, for an inside sales support role. Kartners saw him as an "integral part of the team," but as the company grew it hired a controller who had a Chartered Professional Accountant (CPA) des- ignation and operational training in accounting — qualifications that Adriano didn't have. Adriano identified his job duties as including that of controller managing the overall financial activities of the company, logistics manager, purchasing and LAST YEAR, the Supreme Court of Canada's significant decision in Matthews v. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd. made news because, in part, it reaffirmed employer obligations to act honestly and in good faith towards employees, particularly at the time of dismissal. It was anticipated that, following Matthews, courts would continue to address employer conduct that was dishonest, insensitive, misleading or unduly harsh, with potentially increasing damage awards. The recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision in Humphrey v. Mene - Inc. represents an expansion of the available arsenal to address employer bad faith. In addition to awarding ag - gravated and punitive damages totaling $75,000, the court invalidated a restrictive termination clause in response to the employer's bad faith, increasing the employer's liability for pay in lieu of notice from $3,500 to over $80,000. June 30, 2021 Lack of mitigation reduces B.C. worker's notice entitlement PG.3 Sending out resumés without cover letters and starting woodworking business wasn't reasonable effort at mitigating losses from termination EMPLOYER'S CONDUCT on page 6 » CREDIT: ZINKEVYCH iSTOCK WORKER ASSISTED on page 7 » with Brian Johnston Exaggeration of role, qualifications doesn't increase notice entitlement B.C. worker claimed 13 months' reasonable notice entitlement for 5 years of service, but his role wasn't as significant as he claimed Ask an Expert PG. 2 Harassment complaint followed by bad behaviour Ontario employer's bad faith invalidates termination clause Bad-faith conduct can be considered repudiation of contract BY JEFFREY R. SMITH BY RISHI BANDHU

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - June 30, 2021