Bill 148 and Changes to the Employment Standards Act, 2000

On November 22, 2017, the Ontario Government passed Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017, S.O. 2017 C.22. The Bill received Royal Assent on November 27, 2017.

This post focuses primarily on the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and the implications to Ontario employment law, rather than labour law.

UPDATE: Nearly one year later to the day, November 21, 2018, the Ontario Government, now under a Conservative government, passed Bill 47, the Making Ontario Open for Business Act, 2018, S.O. 2018, C.14. A major effect of Bill 47 was to undo much, but not all of what had been introduced by Bill 148. For a summary of the changes made by Bill 47, see my post Bill 47 - The Making Ontario Open for Business Act, 2018.

Working Notice Inappropriate for Employees on Disability Leave

Few things in law are certain. Even fewer things in life are certain. In fact, it is said that only two things in life are certain: death and taxes. Allow me to submit that there is one more thing in life of which you can be certain: your mother is, was, and will be correct.

Among the myriad things about which your mother was correct is the fact that if you were too sick to go to school, then you were too sick to go out and play once your friends got home from school.

I raise this tautology, actually a repetition of an argument that I made in paper that I authored in 2010 titled Sick of Work? The Legal Minefield of Workplace Burnout, in respect of the case of McLeod v. 1274458 Ontario Inc., 2017 ONSC 4073, which held that working notice was inappropriate for an employee absent from work on medical leave.

Woman’s Miscarriage a “Disability” says Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Is a woman's miscarriage a “disability” under Ontario’s Human Rights Code? Based on the media headlines following a decision by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Mou v. MHPM Project Leaders, 2016 HRTO 327 (CanLII), most people would now likely answer “yes.” But did the Human Rights Tribunal really just say that suffering a miscarriage can qualify as a “disability” under the Code?

Court Censures Employer After Refusing to Reinstate Employee Following Maternity Leave and Creating Childcare Chaos

What will be the court’s censure for an employer’s unwillingness to accommodate its employees’ childcare arrangements, except where legitimate, justifiable grounds exist for being unable to do so? According to the Honourable Justice Susan E. Healey of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, no less than $20,000.

In her reasons for decision reported at Partridge v. Botony Dental Corporation, 2015 ONSC 343, affirmed on appeal 2015 ONCA 836, Justice Healey threw the proverbial book at an employer who not only falsely alleged just cause for dismissal, but also engaged in acts of reprisal and violated one of its employee’s human rights after the employee had taken maternity leave.

In another good hard look at the consequences of messing with an employee’s right to return to work following maternity leave, (see also the case of Bray v Canadian College of Massage and Hydrotherapy, 2015 CanLII 3452 (ON SCSM), a decision of the Ontario Small Claims Court, summarized by this blog in the post Ontario Small Claims Court Awards Human Rights and Punitive Damages after New Mom Constructively Dismissed,) Ontario’s judges continue to demonstrate that an employee’s right to take parental leave is pretty much sacrosanct.

Why is it Time to Fix the Discriminatory EI Regime? Because It’s 2016.

New Year’s Eve is a time of resolution making. Most people take this time to reflect on the year past and look ahead to what they wish to achieve in the year ahead. I am no different.

In 2015, I started work on a project in an attempt to have the Employment Insurance regime amended. Specifically, I believe that the provisions governing maternity/parental leave should be removed from the EI regime and made a stand-alone system. (Standard disclaimer that this is a personal opinion, which may not necessarily be shared by the firm that employs me.) In starting this process I wrote the following executive summary:

By placing the provisions of income replacement benefits for new and expectant parents within Canada’s Employment Insurance regime, the current law creates unexpected and discriminatory consequences for parents who lose their employment either during or shortly following the taking of maternity and/or parental leave. Such a regime would likely not withstand judicial scrutiny in the face of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Canada (Attorney General) v. Johnstone. While the societal benefits of providing publicly funded income replacement benefits to new and expectant parents cannot be challenged, by associating the provision of such benefits with the provision of benefits for the unexpected loss of employment, the present law defeats the intended purposes of both regimes. The recommended solution to this problem is to disassociate the provision of income replacement benefits for new and expectant parents from the Employment Insurance regime, by creating a new regime exclusively for the provision of such benefits.

From there I set about drafting a paper that would address the problems with the current system. It is still a work in progress. The EI system is complicated and has evolved over time, through a series of governments of different political stripes.

Canada now has a new government. New governments, like new years, bring change with them. Whether this government will be interested in such a proposal I cannot say.

What I can say is that the current EI system is broken. Too many people lose their employment as a result of taking time off for maternity and/or parental leave. Changes to the EI regime will not change that unfortunate fact. However, by changing the EI regime insult will not be added to injury.

Thus my resolution for 2016 is this: First and foremost finish what I started, i.e. the paper. Second, find a way to have this idea placed onto the national agenda.

If you’re interested in this project and want to help, please email me at sbawden@kellysantini.com. Assistance can come in any manner of ways, from legal research, to writing, to editing, to public relations. We have all skills and talents.

Happy New Year, dear reader. Why is it time to fix this problems with the EI system? Because it’s 2016.

Decision to Breastfeed a “Personal Choice”, which Need Not be Accommodated: Federal Court of Appeal

Earlier this year I wrote about a decision of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board (“PSLREB”), in which Member Augustus Richardson held that an employee’s work requirements that impacted on that employee’s breastfeeding schedule did not constitute discrimination on the basis of either sex or family status. See: Employers Need Not Accommodate Employees “Choice” to Breastfeed - PSLREB.

Now the Federal Court of Appeal has judicially reviewed that decision and a panel of three judges (two women and one man) upheld it.

In its decision rendered November 10, 2015, (Flatt v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 FCA 250 (CanLII)), the Federal Court of Appeal upheld the decision that the employee’s decision to breastfeed her child was a “personal choice”, holding specifically at paragraph 35 of its reasons for decision that, “Breastfeeding during working hours is not a legal obligation towards the child under her care. It is a personal choice.”

Some people are going to disagree.

Employers Need Not Accommodate Employees “Choice” to Breastfeed - PSLREB

Are work requirements that impact on an employee’s breastfeeding schedules discrimination and, if so, are they discrimination on the basis of sex or family status or both? And does the distinction, if any, matter? What is necessary for a grievor to establish a prima facie case of discrimination on the basis of breastfeeding? What duty, if any, does an employer have to accommodate an employee who is breastfeeding, and how far — and for how long — does that duty extend?

Those were the questions that Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board member Augustus Richardson was asked to answer in the case of Flatt v Treasury Board (Department of Industry), 2014 PSLREB 2 (CanLII). Not easy questions to be sure.

Ontario Small Claims Court Awards Human Rights and Punitive Damages after New Mom Constructively Dismissed

There is a saying in law that “bad facts make bad law.” Of course, the opposite is also true; good facts make good law. In a clear demonstration of the latter, the case of Bray v Canadian College of Massage and Hydrotherapy, 2015 CanLII 3452 (ON SCSM) demonstrates what happens when experienced counsel appears before an experienced trial judge with some pretty decent facts.

While Bray looked at a number of issues of importance to Ontario employment law, the four most interesting features are:

1. The judge’s finding that an indefinite layoff is a constructive dismissal;
2. The judge’s finding that he had no power to award damages for an act of reprisal following a complaint to the Ontario Ministry of Labour;
3. The judge’s award of human rights damages in an Ontario Small Claims decision; and
4. The judge’s award of punitive damages for a breach of the duty of honest performance created by the Supreme Court of Canada in Bhasin v. Hrynew, [2014] S.C.C. 71.

Why the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario may be the Wrong Place to Plead Your Wrongful Dismissal Case

Many people who get fired while pregnant, on maternity or disability leave assume that the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) is the logical place to turn to grieve their case. However, several recent decisions from both the HRTO itself and the Ontario courts demonstrate that that assumption may be misplaced.

While this blog has previously looked at other cases on this topic (see e.g. Human Rights Tribunal Not The Place To Ask For Severance) this post will consider a decision of the HRTO concerning an employee fired while pregnant.

Federal Court of Appeal Affirms Decision that Employers Must Accommodate Employees' Childcare Obligations

On May 2, 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that employers have a legal obligation to accommodate their employees' “childcare obligations” as a component of their duty to accommodate an employee’s “family status.”

In its decisions in the parallel cases of Canada (Attorney General) v. Johnstone, 2014 FCA 110 (CanLII) and Canadian National Railway v. Denise Seeley and Canadian Human Rights Commission the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that the definition of “family status” in the Canadian Human Rights Act includes “parental obligations.”

SCC: Pregnant Women Have the Right to Refuse Unsafe Work Environments

(c) istock/PIKSEL

Does a pregnant woman have the legal right to refuse to work in an environment that is unsafe to her as a pregnant woman? According to a recent decision from the Supreme Court of Canada, concerning a Quebec law, the answer is yes, she does.

Can I get EI if I get Fired After Maternity Leave?

Can someone who gets fired shortly after returning from maternity leave receive Employment Insurance (EI) benefits?

The short answer is currently “no.” Although the answer depends on how long after returning to work the employee finds herself suddenly unemployed. (While it is legally permissible for men to take parental leave and while it is possible for those men to lose their job shortly after doing so, the reality is that this situation is far more common for women than it is for men. While the law is gender neutral and men can be effected by this law in the same way that women are, this post will be written from the perspective of new mothers.)

Ontario Superior Court Awards Human Rights Damages

After years of waiting, the first decision from an Ontario Superior Court judge to award damages pursuant to section 46.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code was published to CanLII on September 12, 2013. Wilson v. Solis Mexican Foods Inc., 2013 ONSC 5799, a decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice A. Duncan Grace concerned a claim for wrongful dismissal damages plus a claim for damages pursuant to the Human Rights Code.

Is the Right to be Reinstated After Pregnancy Leave Guaranteed?

Is the right to be reinstated after pregnancy leave absolutely guaranteed? According to a recent decision from an adjudicator appointed under Part III of the Canada Labour Code, the answer is no.

Pregnant Employees are Entitled to Greater Notice of Dismissal

Is a pregnant woman entitled to a greater amount of notice of her dismissal than other employees? Does firing an employee while she is pregnant merit an award of punitive damages?

At least one Ontario Superior Court judge has said yes to both questions.

Written Notice of Termination for Employees off Work May Not Satisfy ESA Requirements

Must an employer provide an employee absent from work (whether for disability reasons or on account of maternity leave) with actual cash in lieu of notice, or is written notice of termination sufficient?

In a blog post earlier today on the Employers’ Edge it was reported that:

A recent decision of Arbitrator Randy Levinson found that the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”) does not require an employer to pay termination pay to disabled employees if the employer wishes to provide written notice of termination instead.  In Quality Meat Packers Limited and the United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, Local 175 (as yet unreported), Arbitrator Levinson based his decision on the fact that the disabled employees did not provide any services to the employer and were therefore not entitled to any compensation.

For the reasons that follow I find myself at odds with that decision.

Application Seeking Declaration of No Improper Doing in Firing of Employee on Maternity Leave Declared Abuse of Process

Is the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) an appropriate body to decide whether a woman was fired for “legitimate business reasons”? According to a decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Power Tax v. Millar, DioGuardi, 2013 ONSC 135 (CanLII) the answer is, “of course.”

Can I be Fired for Being Pregnant?

For a great number of working women it is one of the single greatest concerns, “Can I be fired for being pregnant?” There are, at least, nine questions embedded in that question:

1. Can I be fired for getting pregnant?
2. Can I be fired for being pregnant?
3. Can I be fired for taking pregnancy or parental leave?
4. What about my benefits while I am on leave?
5. What about my seniority?
6. Can I be fired while on pregnancy leave?
7. Can I be fired after returning from pregnancy leave?
8. How much severance should I get if I am fired?
9. What about EI?

While this blog has previously canvassed the topic of an Ontario woman’s rights in employment, (Fired After Maternity Leave and Are New Parents Entitled to Accommodation) this post will attempt to bring together, in one place, some comprehensive answers to this question of labour.

Employers Must Accommodate Parents - What It Means

On January 31st, 2013, a Federal Court judge affirmed a 2010 ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that said that employers have a duty to accommodate “childcare obligations” as a component of their duty to accommodate an employee’s “family status.” On May 2, 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal varied the Federal Court’s ruling slightly, but for reasons immaterial to this post. In all other respects the court upheld the decision in favour of Ms. Johnstone.

The facts of the case and the courts’ decisions have left many Canadians, both employees and employers, asking questions about what the decision means for them.

Are New Parents Entitled to Accommodation?

Do employers owe a duty to accommodate parents returning from parental leave?