Skip to content

Client Update: Changes to the Canada Labour Code

Federally regulated employers should be aware of changes to the Canada Labour Code (“the Code“) effective April 1, 2014, namely subsections 219 and 223-231 of the Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, chapter 31 of the Statutes of Canada (also referred to as Bill C-45). The changes are briefly reviewed as follows.

New Complaint, Payment Orders, and Vacation Pay Time Lines

As of April 1, 2014 there will be time limits for making complaints of unpaid wages or other allegations of violations under Part III of the Code:

  • Time limits for these complaints will be limited to six months from the day the employer was required to pay wages or other amounts. Any other complaints must be made within six months from the day the subject matter of the complaint arose.
  • Payment orders will cover wages, or other amounts, owing for a period of 12 months starting on the day the complaint was made or the 12 months before the date of termination.

Vacation pay will extend to 24 months from the date of termination or the date of the complaint, whichever is longer.

Administrative Review Mechanism

The April 1, 2014 changes implement an administrative review process for inspector’s payment orders or notice of unfounded complaints:

  • An employee who is notified that his or her unjust dismissal has been rejected can, within 15 days after the day notified, request in writing, with reasons, that the Minister review the inspector’s decision. The Minister may confirm, rescind or direct an inspector to deal with the complaint.
  • A person affected by a payment order or notice of unfounded complaint may, within 15 days after the day on which the order, copy of the order, or notice is served, send a written request with reasons for a review of the decision by the Minister. The Minister may confirm, rescind or vary the payment order or notice of unfounded complaint and, if rescinded, the Minister will direct an inspector to re-examine the complaint.
  • In the case of an employer or a director of a corporation, a review is not permitted unless the amount of the payment order, subject to in the case of a director, the maximum amount of the director’s liability is paid to the Minister.

What this means for federally regulated employers

The new changes will limit what is recoverable to an employee to a defined period of time. These changes are intended to streamline the process. The new time limitations should simplify responding to a complaint, by limiting it to a defined period for the first time. Also it eliminates the possibility for an order which goes back several years to when the employee was first hired. Overall the changes should bring greater efficiency to the process and serve to limit employer risk when facing a complaint.

The foregoing is intended for general information only. If you have any questions, or for a detailed list and background of our Labour & Employment practice group, please visit www.stewartmckelvey.com.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

TTC’s Random Testing Decision: A Bright Light for Employers in the Haze of Marijuana Legalization

April 11, 2017

Rick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…

Read More

Unionization in the Construction Industry: Vacation Day + Snapshot Rule = Disenfranchisement

April 4, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Michelle Black On March 14, 2014, CanMar Contracting Limited (“CanMar”) granted a day off to two of its hard working and longer serving employees so they could spend time with their respective families. That…

Read More

Sometimes a bad deal is just a bad deal: unconscionability and insurance claim settlements in Downer v Pitcher, 2017 NLCA 13

March 16, 2017

Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that…

Read More

Privilege Prevails: Privacy Commissioner protects solicitor-client communications

March 16, 2017

Jonathan Coady After more than five years, the Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “Privacy Commissioner”) has completed her review into more than sixty records withheld by a local school board on the…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Nova Scotia Teachers Union & Government – a synopsis

March 7, 2017

Peter McLellan, QC & Richard Jordan Introduction On February 21, 2017 the Nova Scotia Government passed Bill 75 – the Teachers’ Professional Agreement and Classroom Improvement (2017) Act. This Bulletin will provide some background to what is, today,…

Read More

Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong: The Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador weighs in on the former client rule in commercial transactions

March 1, 2017

Bruce Grant, QC and Justin Hewitt In the recent decision of Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong1 the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador confirmed that where a law firm acts jointly for the borrower and lender in the placement…

Read More

The Ordinary Meaning of Insurance: Client Update on the SCC’s Decision in Sabean

February 21, 2017

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top