Photo of George Avraam

George Avraam was admitted to the Ontario Bar in 1999 and has since practiced as a trial and appellate litigator. George's practice is focused on labour, employment, public and administrative law, class actions, education law, and fiduciary duties. He has acted as lead counsel in arbitrations, administrative proceedings, trials, appeals, judicial reviews, class actions, and injunctions.

George is designated by the Law Society of Ontario as a specialist in civil litigation. He is a Fellow of the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, has been ranked in Chambers Global and Chambers Canada and Ontario (Band 2), has been recommended as a leading lawyer in Legal 500 for Labour and Employment, and has been recommended as a leading employment lawyer in Lexpert. George is also the Chair of the North America Employment and Compensation Law Practice Group and a member of the Global Employment and Compensation Law Practice Group’s Steering Committee.

We’re pleased to share Baker McKenzie’s US Employment & Compensation Law Digest 2018/2019. The Digest outlines recent developments in US law relevant to employers and provides insight on global trends in gender pay, #MeToo, business change, and the modern workforce. In short, it’s an invaluable resource for Canadian companies with operations in the US

We’re pleased to share Jordan Kirkness’s article, here, on the impact to employers of Bill 47, Making Ontario Open for Business Act. The article was published in today’s edition of the Globe and Mail.

If it comes into effect in its current form, Bill 47 will reverse most of Bill 148 (the previous

Join us on Wednesday, October 17, 2018 for an interactive seminar in our Whitespace Legal Collab in Toronto. Our talented team will share their perspectives and facilitate an exchange of ideas and best practices on hot button issues including:

  • Ensuring the workplace doesn’t go to pot
  • Bill 148: where are we now?
  • Responding to #MeToo

We’re pleased to share an informative article, “Know the Joint Employer Risks Where You Operate“, authored by our colleagues Will Woods and Emily Harbison. The article outlines key developments in joint employer liability for franchisors operating in Australia, Canada and Mexico and describes a proactive approach to help mitigate against risk. It was

Since NAFTA came into force in 1994, many Canadian companies established or expanded their business interests in Mexico, including Bombardier, Apotex and McCain, to name a few. With the forthcoming change in Mexico’s administration, Canadian companies with cross-border operations and domestic companies are likewise wondering what the future holds in terms of labour policy.

The Ontario Superior Court recently pronounced that alleged acts of workplace sexual harassment, including alleged incidents occurring in the workplace, are not connected to employment but are separate matters: Watson v. The Governing Council of the Salvation Army of Canada. Further, the Court held that the employer’s release did not bar claims based on these allegations.
Continue Reading

Last week, the Ontario Court of Appeal released yet another decision on the interpretation and enforceability of termination clauses: Amberber v. IBM Canada Ltd., 2018 ONCA 571. Recent appellate decisions on this issue have been inconsistent and/or provided less than clear guidelines, see here, here, here and here. In contrast, Amberber is a bright spot for employers. The Court not only reaffirmed the principle that termination clauses must be interpreted as a whole, but also held that courts should not strain to create an ambiguity where none exists.
Continue Reading

Employers who include discretionary bonuses as part of their employees’ compensation packages should be aware of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s latest guidance on (i) bonus entitlement for the period up to dismissal and (ii) compensation for the loss of a bonus during the reasonable notice period. This guidance came in the Court’s decision, issued last week, in Singer v. Nordstrong Equipment Limited, 2018 ONCA 364. Our analysis of the lower court’s decision in this case can be found here
Continue Reading