Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2014
September
3,
2014
|
Canadian
Employment
Law
Today
Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2014 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2014
employment law blog
Canadian Employment Law Today invites you to check out its employment law
blog, where editor Jeffrey R. Smith discusses recent cases and developments
in employment law. The blog includes a tool for readers to offer their comments,
so discussion is welcome and encouraged. The blog features topics such as
wrongful dismissal, cutting staff, discrimination vs. just being mean, and proper
investigations.
You can view the blog at www.employmentlawtoday.com.
adjudicator agreed with DHL and dis-
missed the complaint.
"Summarizing, (Sigloy) entered into a
valid and enforceable contract of employ-
ment, the terms of which were in com-
pliance with the code. Further, (Sigloy's)
initial complaint does not allege the dis-
missal involved discrimination, reprisal
or bad faith. In the circumstances, I find I
am without jurisdiction and grant the em-
ployer's preliminary objection. Accord-
ingly, the complaint is dismissed," said the
adjudicator.
Takeaways for employers
is decision has some important take-
aways for federally regulated employers, the
most obvious of which is the importance of
having valid and enforceable employment
contracts containing termination clauses
meeting the minimum requirements of the
code with all employees. Additionally, this
decision reinforces that employers must al-
ways act in good faith when terminating an
employee because a valid contract will not
bar an unjust dismissal complaint where
the dismissal was motivated by discrimina-
tion, reprisal or was otherwise in bad faith.
is decision also raises strategic consid-
erations for both employers and employees
in future cases. Where an employer is de-
bating whether it has just cause to termi-
nate an employee and the employee has a
contract with a valid termination clause, it
may make financial sense to terminate the
employee without cause and provide com-
pensation in accordance with the contract
to insulate the employer from the costs of
an unjust dismissal complaint and a poten-
tial award under the code if the dismissal is
ultimately found to be without cause.
Conversely, there will likely be a spike in
employees who allege that their termina-
tion was discriminatory or in bad faith as
a means of avoiding the preliminary objec-
tion raised in this case.
For more information see:
• Sigloy and DHL Express (Canada) Ltd.,
Re, 2014 CarswellNat 815 Can. Adjud.
(CLC Part III)).
• Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. v. Wilson,
2013 CarswellNat 3191 (F.C.).
About the Author
JuStin tEtREAuLt
Justin Tetreault is an associate with Grosman, Grosman
& Gale LLP in Toronto. He represents both employers
and employees in all aspects of labour, employment and
human resources law with a particular focus on wrong-
ful dismissal litigation. He can be reached at jtetreault@
grosman.com.
CRedit:
deNYS
PRYkhOdOV/ShUtteRStOCk.COm
