DSF Announcements Make A Payment Careers Testimonials Blogs
Toronto Barrie Whitby Midland Collingwood Haliburton Other Locations
416-449-1400

LAWYER SEARCH

    • Tag: Labour Relations Act

    Bill-66-Changes-to-the-Employment-Standards-and-Labour-Relations-Acts

    Bill 66: Changes to the Employment Standards and Labour Relations Acts

    Bill 66, which received royal assent on April 3rd, 2019, changes the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) and the Labour Relations Act (LRA).

    Workplaces that are covered by the ESA should take note that:

    • Posting requirements are no more: Employers are no longer required to display a poster in the workplace delineating the ESA’s applicable regulations and rules. However, employers remain obligated to provide a poster delineating ESA rules and regulations to their employees.
    • Agreements extending the ESA overtime limit no longer require approval: Employers no longer need to apply for approval to make agreements allowing their employees to exceed 48 hours of work in a work week. As long as there has been an agreement between the employer and the employee extending the amount of hours the employee can work, employers are not violating the ESA.
    • Overtime-averaging agreements no longer require approval: Employers no longer need to apply for approval to make an agreement with an employee to average their employee’s hours of work for the purpose of determining entitlements to overtime pay. Note, however, that the employee’s hours may be averaged in accordance with the terms of an averaging agreement only if the overtime period in the agreement does not exceed four weeks.

    Workplaces that are covered by the LRA should take note that:

    • The list of non-construction employers has been expanded: municipalities, local boards, school boards, local housing corporations, hospitals, Ontario colleges and universities now no longer apply to the LRA’s rules with respect to construction employees.
    • Employers listed under this new provision may opt-out, but only if: (1) A trade union represents employees of the employer who are employed, or may be employed, in the construction industry as of April 3, 2019; (2) The application must be made by a person with authority to bind the employer; and (3) The election must be filed with the Minister of Labour within three months of April 3, 2019.

    If you would like more information about these amendments, or would like legal advice to ensure your place of work follows these new requirements, please contact experienced employment lawyer Marty Rabinovitch of Devry Smith Frank LLP at 416-446-5826 or marty.rabinovitch@devrylaw.ca

     

    “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.”

     

    By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Employment Law, Labour Law
    Employment Bill 148 is Being Scrapped…But Which Parts Are Uncertain

    Employment Bill 148 is Being Scrapped…But Which Parts Are Uncertain

    Last week Doug Ford announced that he was halting the implementation of a $15 per hour minimum wage in Ontario but it looks like he is seeking to additionally roll back other employment laws that have already come into force. Yesterday, October 2, 2018, Doug Ford announced in the Ontario legislature that he was going to scrap Bill 148, a bill enacted by the previous Liberal government (after a broad consultation) that increased protections for workers in an effort to alleviate the impacts of precarious work (see our previous blogs on Bill 148).

    Bill 148 introduced many new provisions to both Ontario’s Employment Standards Act and Ontario’s unionized Labour Relations Act. Some of the new provisions included a presumption that a worker is automatically an employee unless it is proven otherwise (an employee classification gets the most protection under labour and employment legislation), mandated scheduling provisions including the expansion of the “3 hour rule” (i.e. an employee gets paid for three hours of work if his/her shift is cancelled less than 48 hours before he or she was to commence working), equal pay for equal work laws between full and part-time workers, personal emergency leave provisions (10 days of emergency leave absences with 2 days of paid leave), and increased regulation on temporary help agencies.

    However, whether Bill 148 is going to be axed in its entirety or in a piecemeal fashion remains to be seen. Doug Ford’s statements in the legislature were incredibly broad, saying “We’re getting rid of Bill 148. We’re going to make sure we protect the front-line workers because 60,000 people lost their jobs under Bill 148 … We’re going to make sure we tell the world Ontario is open for business. We’re going to make sure we’re competitive around the world.”

    After Question Period, reporters swarmed Jim Wilson, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, with respect to Ford’s comments. Wilson scaled back Ford’s comments, stating that the government was still reviewing Bill 148 and a final decision had yet to be made. Wilson made statements that despite the Conservative government voting against the Bill when the Liberals introduced it, they were likely going to keep the $14 an hour minimum wage and other sections.

    Devry Smith Frank LLP will be monitoring the province’s efforts to scrap Bill 148. It is important to contact a labour and employment law lawyer to keep apprised of recent legislative developments and get advice on how it will impact your business or personal contracts. If you need assistance with labour and employment laws please contact one of our employment lawyers.

    “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.”
    By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Employment Law, Labour Law
    Colleges and Faculty to Continue Contract Discussion to Avoid Strike

    Colleges and Faculty to Continue Contract Discussion to Avoid Strike

    In a previous blog post, we discuss the call for a strike that Ontario’s colleges faculty members will vote for in the fall, after rejecting a 7.5% wage hike offered by the Ontario government. Now, they are back to negotiating after the Thanksgiving weekend.

    Ontario’s colleges are back at the bargaining table today, as the strike deadline of October 15th approaches. The talks have been put on hiatus at the end of September after no progress was made.

    The union represents “full-time professors as well as “partial load” instructors who teach between seven and 12 hours a week, as well as college counsellors and librarians,” and the last offer that was received from the colleges provided a 7.5 per cent raise over four years, as well as improvements to benefits and a lump-sum payment which they did not accept.

    CEO of the college council, Don Sinclair, has reassured students that the colleges are concerned and will provide updates as they become available.

    In this case, the government has indicated that, before any strike vote, that the faculty union members vote on the last offer they have received. Employers usually have this right, stored under s. 42 of the Labour Relations Act, which says:

    1. (1) Before or after the commencement of a strike or lock-out, the employer of the employees in the affected bargaining unit may request that a vote of the employees be taken as to the acceptance or rejection of the offer of the employer last received by the trade union in respect of all matters remaining in dispute between the parties and the Minister shall, and in the construction industry the Minister may, on the terms that he or she considers necessary direct that a vote of the employees to accept or reject the offer be held and thereafter no further such request shall be made.

    The ability for the employer to call for a vote is a tactic of last resort—and can only be done once. In fact, in 2010, when the current collective agreement was signed, colleges used s. 42 to call for a vote, which approved the agreement with a slim majority. Only time will tell to see if this strategy will pay off for a second time, or if both parties will be forced to return to the bargaining table.

    Devry Smith Frank LLP is a full service law firm that has a very experienced group of lawyers within our employee and labour law groups. If you are in need of representation, please contact one of our lawyers today or call us directly at 416-449-1400.

    By: Nicolas Di Nardo

    “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.”
    By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Employment Law, Labour Law
    Significant Changes Coming to Ontario’s Labour and Employment Laws

    Significant Changes Coming to Ontario’s Labour and Employment Laws

    Ontario is one step closer to approving the minimum wage increase of $15 an hour, however that is not the only change that is on Ontario’s horizon. A legislative committee studying the bill has concluded its work, advancing the bill to the fall session of the legislature, which begins September 11.

    Bill 148, known as the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, includes much more than a dramatic increase in the minimum wage. The bill makes large amendments to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”), Ontario’s minimum standards legislation, and the Labour Relations Act (“LRA”), which governs unionization. Many of these changes are favourable to employees, in an effort to alleviate the impacts of precarious work.

    Based on a worker’s classification as either an “employee,” “dependent contractor,” and “independent contractor,” a worker gets different rights under Ontario’s minimum standards legislation. The Ontario government seeks to introduce an automatic presumption that a worker is an “employee” (entitling them to the most rights) and that it would be illegal for an employer to misclassify its workers (to evade minimum standards legislation).

    The government also proposed to regulate scheduling inside a workplace. If the bill is passed, an employee who has been working for more than three months in a workplace can request a change in their schedule or work location without fearing dismissal. The well-known “3 hour rule” (i.e that a worker be paid for at least 3 hours for a shift) has been expanded to all workplaces and will even be triggered if an employer cancels a shift 48 hours before the employee was to commence working. An employee will also gain the right to refuse shifts without fear of termination if the request is made less than 96 hours before the proposed shift was to begin.

    Vacation pay entitlements will also be increased: an employee working less than 5 years for the same employer will continue to receive 2 weeks of paid vacation but an employee working more than 5 years for the same employer will receive 3 weeks of statutory vacation.

    The government also focused on making stronger provisions for equal pay for equal work. If passed, it would become illegal to pay part-time workers less than full-time workers and temporary help workers less than their directly-hired counterparts (absent other objective factors). Moreover, if a worker believes that they were being paid less on the basis of sex or employment status, they would gain the right to request a written review where the employer must either a) raise their wage or b) provide written reasons about why they disagree.

    Temporary help agencies would also face further regulation on their practices, including owing its employees one week “termination of assignment” pay (similar to “severance pay”) if the employee was terminated from a contract that was supposed to last 3 months or more. These employees would not get “termination of assignment” pay if they were placed in a new contract within a week.

    The government also hopes to introduce two (2) days of paid leave of absences and eight (8) days of unpaid personal emergency leave. This leave would cover personal illnesses, injuries and medical emergencies (for both the employee and his or her close relatives) and situations of sexual or domestic violence. Employers can request reasonable evidence of the employee’s entitlement to take the leave.

    It will also become less burdensome to file a complaint under the ESA. Previously, employees who felt their minimum standards were being breached needed to first notify their employer before making a complaint. This requirement would be removed under the new bill. The Director (the person who enforces the ESA) will also be allowed to collect security for any amounts owing under the ESA. Notices of contravention and Recognitions would be able to be widely publicized, despite privacy laws.

    Alcohol servers and others would be happy to know that the government has created a more specific definition of what constitutes a “tip” in order to prevent employers from stealing tips meant for their employees.

    The field of labour and employment law is becoming very complex for both employees and employers. It is important to seek out an experience labour and employment lawyer who knows not only the current law, but changes on the horizon.

    Devry Smith Frank LLP is a full service law firm that has a very experienced group of lawyers within our employee and labour law groups. If you are in need of representation, please contact one of our lawyers today or call us directly at 416-449-1400.

    By: Michelle Cook, Summer Law Student

    “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.”
    By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Employment Law, Labour Law