As per labour relations legislation, some employees are excluded from collective bargaining. In the past this exclusion has survived Charter scrutiny as it has been held that the freedom of association and freedom of speech do not guarantee a right to collectively bargain. However, newer case law seems to suggest that there is a Charter protected right to collectively bargain. In Health Services, it was held that the Charter includes a procedural right to collectively bargain, but does not guarantee particular objectives. Further, the Charter does not protect all aspects of associational activity, only those which constitute a substantial interference with associational activity. Notably, Bill 5 in SK designates certain employees as “essential services”, and restricts their rights to collectively bargain.
Generally, independent contractors are excluded from collective bargaining. It is believed that they are financially independent enough such that they do not require the protection of collective bargaining. Either of the tests above can be applied to determine if an individual is a contractor or an employee.
When it comes to wrongful dismissal, the main job of the court is to determine what is reasonable notice (i.e. you get paid money to compensate you). This is an implied term of the employment contract as per common law. There are two main approaches to determine reasonable notice. The oft-cited Bardal approach where the court considers such factors as the character of employment, length of service of the servant, age of the servant and availability of similar employment (most important) having regard to the experience, training, and qualifications of the servant. The Bardal approach is augmented with by the Lazarowicz approach, approved by the SK QB in Bartlam. Here, the court imagines that the employer and the employee had sat down at had a chat at the time the employee was hired. How much of a notice period would they have agreed upon? This approach is useful because it takes it flexibly takes into account factors such as the economic situation, norms of the industry and so on.
The measure of damages for wrongful dismissal is governed by the length of the notice period in the contract of employment, because what makes the dismissal unlawful at common law is the employer’s failure to give due notice or wages in lieu of. Therefore, the employer can recover only for wages and benefits that he or she would have been legally entitled to during the contractual notice period.
If the employer acted in a particularly repulsive way in the manner of dismissal, there is no additional recourse for the employee unless the employee can show that the employer’s conduct constituted an independently actionable tort such as mental distress (Honda v. Keays).
There’s an old saying that attorneys are a, “dime a dozen”. With the advent of social media the tools to select the right attorney for the right job, and compare all at the same time, is at your fingertips.
That means the following concern should happen less in our digital age.
My attorney for 2 years has done nothing that I understand. I drive 80 miles one way for a meeting and we discuss options/strategies then I leave (after she charges 400.00) and she does not follow thru. Continue reading “Dime a Dozen for Attorneys – Do Your Research”
In tort law if you come from the perspective of the economist then judges behave ‘as if’ they were setting precedents that discourages negligent behaviour. There are two primary approaches:
1) ex ante: precedent used as deterrent,
2) ex post: used to compensate victims.
For the most, a house will be the single greatest purchase of their lifetime. This is particularly true in large cities where real-estate prices are much higher than rural areas. There is a significant amount of research, a well defined process, and necessary expertise to close real-estate transactions. But are there differences between single family home and townhouse / condo transactions?
Yes there is, and it’s more than just preference, but let’s start there.
In Canada, depending on the province where you reside, there are certain benefits that your insurer has to pay to you after you’ve been in a car accident. Often referred to as the ‘Section B’ insurer, insurance has to pay certain benefits. Generally speaking, there are both income loss and medical expense benefits that are potentially payable. An often overlooked entitlement under the Section B benefits in Alberta is the right to claim $135 a week if you are not employed and are unable to perform your household duties. This is often referred to as the ‘homemaker’s benefit’. The relevant section of the policy reads as follows :
What’s perhaps the greatest asset when seeking adequate compensation for a slip or fall injury? Quite simply it’s pictures. A picture in this case would be worth a 1000 words. Pictures from multiple angles, with measurement tools or comparison objects, close ups, even a landscape shot, there’s no shortage of how many pictures you can take of a scene.
Help yourself build a case by ensuring your ‘evidence’ is substantial. Continue reading “Pictures of Your Slip & Fall”
Is it true that you are entitled to certain insurance benefits from your own insurer, regardless of who was at fault? It’s true, in Canada these benefits are often called ‘Section B benefits’. However, insurers like to erroneously inform injured clients that they will only ‘authorize’ 21 treatments (of various kinds). This is not true. Continue reading “Limiting Your Treatments after Injury”