Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Spring 2015
Hello! We are very pleased to be the new Atlantic Employers’ Counsel (AEC) editors. We look forward to bringing you what we hope you will find to be interesting articles and we welcome your feedback.
To celebrate our inaugural edition, we thought probationary employees was an appropriate theme. And who better to write on that topic than four of Stewart McKelvey’s up-and-coming associates (with thanks as well to articled clerk, soon-to-join-us-as-an-associate in the Labour & Employment group, Dante Manna).
Avoiding the “long-haul” begins with the agreement
It all starts with the agreement.
Probationary periods are a useful tool for employers assessing the suitability of new hires.
Generally, a valid agreement setting out a probationary period allows the employer to dismiss an employee during the probationary period without meeting the high threshold of just cause.
Well, what did you expect? Setting expectations for probationary employees
Hiring employees on a probationary basis allows employers to ensure they hire the right people. While implementing trial periods for new employees has many advantages, employers should be aware of key rules applying to probationary employees to avoid potential costly liability should the relationship not work out.
Is the duty to accommodate less onerous for probationary employees? Possibly…
A recent case from the Alberta Court of Appeal considered this question in the context of an employee with Asperger’s syndrome working at a call centre but, unfortunately, did not provide a definitive answer. Although the decision suggests that the duty to accommodate can be less onerous for probationary and short service employees, the threshold for establishing undue hardship is onerous and is always judged on a case by case basis.
How to dismiss so it’s not amiss – termination guidelines for probationary employees
Dismissing a short-term probationary employee can be a risky proposition, with expensive consequences if not done properly. Where just cause exists, the employee can be terminated with minimal risk that compensation will be awarded. However, in probationary employment, the decision to terminate is not always based on just cause. Instead it may be based on other considerations such as whether certain performance goals were met. This article focuses on how to terminate without just cause.
Archive
By Sarah Dever Letson, CIPP/C, Meaghan McCaw and Bertina Lou[1] Two decisions earlier this month from the Court of Appeal for British Columbia left open the question as to whether so-called “database defendants” can be held…
Read MoreIn conjunction with our upcoming sponsorship of the Halifax Chamber of Commerce luncheon, featuring the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources the Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, we are pleased to present a Thought Leadership article highlighting…
Read MoreBy Jennifer Taylor & Marina Luro A recent Supreme Court of Canada decision has clarified how to interpret exclusion clauses in sale of goods contracts. The Court in Earthco Soil Mixtures Inc. v Pine Valley…
Read MoreBy Mark Tector and Tiegan A. Scott Decision On April 3, 2024, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench (“ABKB”) upheld a decision of the Chief of the Commissions and Tribunals (the “CCT Decision”), which held…
Read MoreBy Erin Best, Stephen Penney, Robert Bradley, Megan Kieley1 and Elizabeth Fleet1 Expropriation is a live issue in Canadian courts. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to broaden the test for constructive expropriation in Annapolis…
Read MoreBy Killian McParland and Sophie Poulos There have been many changes in recent months affecting employers governed by federal labour and employment laws. In September 2024, Stewart McKelvey will be hosting a webinar to review…
Read MoreBy Mark Tector and Annie Gray What’s changing? Currently, workers’ compensation coverage in Nova Scotia applies to only a narrow subset of psychological injuries. Specifically, in Nova Scotia – as in all Atlantic Provinces –…
Read MoreBy Sean Kelly & Michiko Gartshore Professional regulators can incur substantial costs through discipline processes. These costs are often associated with investigations, hearings as well as committee member expenses and are an unfortunate by-product of…
Read MoreBy Christine Pound, ICD.D., Twila Reid, ICD.D., Sarah Dever Letson, CIPP/C, Sheila Mecking, Hilary Newman, and Daniel Roth Introduction The first reports under the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act (the…
Read MoreBy Sheila Mecking and Sarah Dever Letson A recent decision out of the Court of King’s Bench of New Brunswick,[1] upheld the Municipality of Tantramar’s decision to withhold a Workplace Assessment Report under section 20(1)…
Read More