Canadian Employment Law Today

April 30, 2014

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

PM40065782 Emplo y ment Law Today Canad a ian April 30, 2014 WCB eligibility for federal workers subject to provincial rules pg. 3 Parks Canada employee unsuccessfully challenges denial of claim under Alberta policy City worker's water use doesn't wash Water department worker's tampering with water meter at home was theft that struck at heart of employer's interests BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ARBITRATOR has upheld the fi ring of an Ottawa city worker who was caught tampering with the water meter in his home over a period of several years. e 46-year-old worker was an operator- in-charge in the water distribution section of Ottawa's drinking water services depart- ment. His responsibilities included direct- ing a handful of employees in the installa- tion, repair, maintenance and operation of the city's water distribution system. e worker began his employment with the City of Ottawa in 1990. On Jan. 30, 2012, Ottawa's deputy city treasurer received an anonymous written complaint that claimed the worker had been "stealing water for years" by modifying the water meter at his home so it didn't accu- rately record water use. e complaint also said the worker had helped others alter their meters so they could steal water. e deputy treasurer reported the com- plaint to the city's fraud and waste hotline and auditor general. An investigation was launched involving the city departments of fi nance, corporate security, labour relations and environmental services, with the con- sultation of the Ottawa police. e investigation included a review of the worker's water consumption at his home. An advanced meter infrastructure (AMI) — a technology that transmitted water meter readings directly rather than having some- one read the meters manually that was be- ing implemented at the time — was installed BMO advisor fi red after customer co-signs loan BANK OF MONTREAL Investments (BMOI) wrongfully dismissed a fi nancial planner for a confl ict of interest that didn't really happen, the Nova Scotia Small Claims Court has ruled. Tammy Mercier was hired as a fi nancial planner for BMOI in August 2010, after several years of employment with Bank of Montreal (BMO) fi nancial group. Her job involved encouraging customers to invest in the banks' fi nancial products and provid- ing advice to customers with investment portfolios with BMOI. Mercier had no role in loans, lines of credit or other banking operations, which were part of the regular bank (BMO), not BMOI. Mercier knew the late husband of one of BMO's clients and developed a friendship with her after the client's husband died. e client owned and operated a construction and rental property company and most of her business dealings and her commercial account were through BMO. In July 2011, BMO informed the client her GICs were up for renewal and her sig- nature was required. e account manager of the client's commercial account wanted to get a better interest rate for the client's GICs and asked Mercier to do this. is was a common practice, as commercial account managers were encouraged to pass GICs up for renewal to fi nancial planners to see if TAMPERING on page 6 » CONFLICT OF INTEREST on page 7 » New look, same great content WELCOME TO THE new Canadian Employ- ment Law Today. We've taken the country's most popular source for employment law information and given it a fresh look. You will still fi nd the valuable content you've come to expect in each issue, in- cluding employment law news, Ask an Ex- pert, Case In Point, and You Make the Call. But we've changed the typeface, added more colour and introduced graphics — all without reducing the word count, so you'll get more information than ever before. We hope you like the new look. Have feedback? We'd love to hear it. Email us at IN SHORT Case In Point pg. 4 CIBC didn't have just cause to dismiss fi nancial advisor in case that shows importance of proper investigations ASK AN EXPERT pg. 2 Workplace investigation requirements CREDIT: DJEM/SHUTTERSTOCK.COM with Tim Mitchell

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - April 30, 2014