This is the final article in our three-part series on recent changes to Alberta’s labour and employment legislation. Here we outline changes to Alberta’s occupational health and safety (“OHS”) and workers’ compensation legislation resulting from Bill 30: An Act to Protect the Health and Well-being of Working Albertans.
Continue Reading Alberta Strengthens Workplace Safety Legislation
Does the workplace extend into cyberspace? In a precedent setting decision with potentially far-reaching implications, a labour arbitrator has found an employer liable for failing to protect its workers from harassment and discrimination in customer posts on the employer’s Twitter account (Toronto Transit Commission and ATU, Local 113, 2016 CarswellOnt 10550). Employers using social media to communicate with clients, customers or the general public may need to rethink how to they respond to uncivil, abusive or threatening online posts targeting their workers.
Continue Reading Are Employers Responsible for Protecting Their Employees on Social Media? “Yes” According to a Recent Decision
Catch ’em all! Pokémon Go is a mobile game that uses “augmented” reality to create a virtual scavenger hunt. In the quest to catch ’em all, over 15 million people have downloaded the Pokémon Go game since its recent release. Employers have grappled with employees’ personal use of electronic devices during work hours since gaming fads such as Candy Crush and Draw Something were released. However, beyond creating a simple distraction in the workplace, the explosion of Pokémon Go subjects employers to potentially costly risks, including worker safety issues, lost productivity, data breach possibilities, and misuse of company resources.
Continue Reading Pokémon Whoa – Reality Game App Creates Unprecedented Risks for Employers
Ontario Legislature Passes Bill 132: What Employers Need to Know
Bill 132 will increase the obligations on employers to protect employees against workplace harassment. The Ontario Government recently passed Bill 132, Sexual Violence and Harassment Action Plan Act (Supporting Survivors and Challenging Sexual Violence and Harassment), 2015 and employers will need to comply with its requirements as of September 8, 2016.Continue Reading September is fast approaching – New Sexual Violence and Harassment Law will apply to Ontario Employers
A recent New York Times article about the workplace culture at Amazon has spurred increased debate about the value of so-called “purposeful Darwinism”, in which competitive pressures (both internal and external to the workplace) and grand ambitions foster a cut-throat and gruelling workplace environment that leaves employees struggling to keep up or out in the cold.
Being at the top of any field, some would argue, demands this type of attitude and requires employees and managers who settle for nothing less than the best. When a company operates in a fast-paced, high-stakes industry that rewards continual improvement, hyper-efficiency, precision, and immediate satisfaction, there may be very little room for either error or rest. In exchange for a few years of catering to extraordinary expectations, employees receive above-marker compensation, responsibility, and experience that they might not gain in a less exacting workplace. This assumes, of course, that employees have the option of moving up or moving on, which is often more true for white-collar employees than blue-collar ones.
On the other hand, some companies appear to have achieved remarkable growth while maintaining a positive space for employee engagement and encouraging a more even work/life balance – on the whole, even if not day-to-day. For these companies, corporate sustainability extends beyond ensuring a healthy profit margin and minimal carbon footprint. Rather, it also involves ensuring that key talent can be attracted, encouraged, and maintained and that the diversity of the workforce is harnessed and propelled into innovative ideas and approaches. This attitude towards employee relations may require sacrificing short-term gains for potentially long-term viability – a cost that some employers, particularly those with demanding shareholders, may be unwilling or unable to pay.
Continue Reading Workplace Tug-of-War: Balancing Employee Demands with Employer Expectations
We rarely think about emergencies before they arrive on our doorstep. Yet, the recent civil unrest in Baltimore has presented another eye-opening reminder that no one can predict how or when an emergency might strike. While it might come as a fire or a flood – rather than a riot – it’s clear that when an unexpected crisis arises, it may take a toll on business. But don’t panic. Remain calm. There is one helpful thing that every employer can do; have a plan.
Few people can think clearly and logically during a crisis, so it is important to prepare thoroughly in advance. While no amount of preparation can eliminate all the risks, careful and meticulous planning will undoubtedly limit the costs of inevitable emergencies, save money in the long run and help get the business back to prospering.
Continue Reading Before Disaster Strikes: Planning for the Worst Instead of Hoping for the Best
It could be a blizzard, a hurricane or a torrential downpour. The fact of the matter is that Mother Nature can, and will, strike; and, no matter what form it comes in, severe weather imposes challenges upon businesses of all sizes. When faced with issues like slippery or flooded roads, it can be tough to balance the needs of a business with the safety of its employees.
We often get questions from employers who are staring into the face of the proverbial tornado and trying to understand their rights and obligations. This blog will address four of the most commonly asked questions.
Continue Reading Weather Permitting? Employer Rights When Faced With Severe Weather
As of July 1, 2014, employers operating in Ontario must ensure their occupational health and safety programs satisfy new worker and supervisor training requirements.
Continue Reading Ontario Imposes New Mandatory Occupational Health and Safety Awareness Training Requirements
In R. v Metron, 2013 ONCA 541, Metron Construction Corporation (“Metron”) was found to have committed criminal negligence in failing to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to its workers. Metron is the first case decided under the criminal negligence provisions of the Criminal Code where the parties did not agree on the sentence. At the trial level, Metron pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a fine of $200,000.
Continue Reading Court of Appeal Imposes Criminal Liability and Significant Fine for Workplace Accident
