Canadian Employment Law Today

April 11, 2018

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 ad a ian April 11, 2018 with Stuart Rudner ASK AN EXPERT pg. 2 Time lapsed between request and accommodation Workplace disagreements are not harassment Professor frustrated by associate dean's criticism and disagreement with certain things, but his harassment complaints were dismissed BY JEFFREY R. SMITH CRITICISM AND disagreement from management may not always be pleasant for employees to experience, but it doesn't necessarily qualify as harassment and bullying. So said an Ontario arbitrator in dismissing a college professor's grievances against his college and associate dean. e professor was hired to a partial-load position in 2012 and then a full-time posi- tion in 2013 at the Sheridan College School of Business in Oakville, Ont. He was con- sidered an above-average teacher – perfor- mance reviews by students were regularly around 90 per cent – but had some disagree- ments with his associate dean. e associate dean – who was chair of the committee that hired the professor – claimed to be support- ive of the professor, but felt he didn't easily accept doing things di erently than the way he preferred and could be di cult to manage – something the hiring committee had been concerned about before hiring him. As a re- sult, over time the professor became more combative and less apt to collaborate. In April 2013, two students appealed the exam marks given to them by the profes- sor for di erent reasons. e professor was strongly against the appeals but the associate dean granted both of them. According to the professor, the associate dean told him dur- ing discussion of one of the appeals that "this could be your last rodeo, cowboy," which the associate dean denied as not something he would say – though he acknowledged the Fire ghter's o -duty driving suspension doesn't warrant ring Strong job performance and respect of re ghters meant o -duty incident didn't irreparably harm employment relationship: Court BY JEFFREY R. SMITH FAILING TWO breathalyzer tests while driving o -duty and a 90-day driving suspension did not provide just cause to dismiss a well-respected and accomplished British Columbia re ghter, the B.C. Supreme Court has ruled. Kerry Klonteig was a re ghter for the city of Kelowna, B.C. He rst trained as a re ghter in 1990 and worked as an on-call re ghter — working another job while re- sponding to a call if there's a re — in Na- naimo, B.C, before transferring to Kelowna in 1992. ree years later, he became a full- time re ghter for Kelowna. Klonteig performed well in his work as a full-time re ghter and was promoted to the position of assistant re chief in 2005 — one of four assistant chiefs reporting to the city's re chief. He was responsible for opera- Workplace accident the result of insuf cient training, not safety violation pg. 3 Workers weren't trained on circumstances that led to collision Suncor worker red after calling in sick during wild res pg. 4 Company claimed worker changed his story on illness, but he properly followed call-in procedure PROFESSOR on page 7 » CREDIT: NIKAMO/SHUTTERSTOCK 24 OF 28 on page 6 »

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - April 11, 2018