In Kingston (City) v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 109 (Hudson Grievance),  O.L.A.A. No. 393 (Newman), the arbitrator upheld the dismissal of 28-year employee who uttered death threats at a co-worker.
Tha arbitrator also outlined how, in her view, Bil 168 changed the legal analysis in Ontario in four ways in cases involving verbal threats in the workplace, stating: read more »
Entire agreement clause prohibits former CEO's claims for collateral agreement and negligent misrepresentation
In McNeely v. Herbal Magic Inc., 2011 ONSC 4237 the court ruled that an "entire agreement" clause in the employment contract (and in another agreement) was fatal to a former president and CEO's claim for damages for breach of a collateral agreement and for negligent misrepresentation against the company that he used to work for and that had terminated his employment.
The Ontario Ministry of Labour has posted a policy document on its website, titled "Are Unpaid Internships Legal in Ontario? (June 2011)". The policy document reads as follows:
The Ministry of Labour is committed to ensuring fairness and protecting young workers. The fact that you are called an "intern" does not determine whether or not you are entitled to the protections of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), including the minimum wage. read more »
It is a case concerning two employees of the Bank of Montreal who worked at different branches. Over the course of four years, one employee (the "Defendant") accessed the personal banking information of the other employee, who was also a customer of the bank (the "Plaintiff"), on 176 occasions.
Rather than filing a complaint with the federal privacy commissioner under PIPEDA, and ultimately going to the federal court for recourse, the Plaintiff sued the Defendant for the common law tort of invasion of privacy.
In its decision issued on March 23, 2011, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, citing precedent, ruled that there is no tort of invasion of privacy in Ontario.
The Ontario Court of Appeal will now have an opportunity to weigh in on this issue. read more »
ONCA allows appeal, grants declaration that restrictive covenant is unreasonable and therefore unenforceable
In Mason v. Chem-Trend Limited Partnership, 2011 ONCA 344, the Ontario Court of appeal overturned the application judge's decision and ruled that the following restrictive covenant was unreasonable and therefore unenforceable against a 17 year technical salesperson whose employment was terminated for just cause:
I agree that if my employment is terminated for any reason by me or by the Company, I will not, for a period of one year following the termination, directly or indirectly, for my own account or as an employee or agent of any business entity, engage in any business or activity in competition with the Company by providing services or products to, or soliciting business from, any business entity which was a customer of the Company during the period in which I was an employee of the Company, or take any action that will cause the termination of the business relationship between the Company and any customer, or solicit for employment any person employed by the Company.