In a year marked by significant shifts in employment law and workplace practices, HR Law Canada has been at the forefront, delivering insights and analysis on the issues that matter most to HR professionals, lawyers, and business leaders.
As 2024 draws to a close, we’re taking a look back at the stories that captured your attention, sparked conversations, and provided valuable guidance. From groundbreaking legal rulings to expert advice on navigating complex workplace challenges, these are the top 10 most-read articles of the year—each offering a snapshot of the evolving landscape of labour and employment law in Canada.
10. Do your workers have ‘side hustles?’ Here’s how employers can (and should) respond
A recent H&R Block Canada survey revealed that nearly 9 million Canadians, or 28% of the population, now participate in the gig economy, doubling from 13% in 2022. The rise of side hustles, driven by financial pressures and remote work opportunities, has sparked employer concerns about “moonlighting” employees. Employment lawyer Lai-King Hum highlighted potential conflicts of interest and the duty of loyalty under common law, especially for roles involving competitors. Hum advised employers to address conflicts through clear employment contract clauses, such as conflict of interest and “full-time and attention” provisions, and recommended proactive communication to manage potential issues. Read the full story.
9. Woman awarded $39,000 after being sexually harassed by family friend during work trip to install solar panels
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario awarded over $39,000 to a 20-year-old woman, AK, who experienced unwanted advances and sexual harassment from her employer, ML, during her employment at AHMIC Maintenance & Storage. The incidents culminated in a July 2017 work trip where ML made physical contact, expressed romantic feelings, and pressured her to swim despite her refusal. AK, who viewed ML as a trusted family friend, suffered significant psychological distress due to the harassment. The award included $26,000 for injury to dignity, $13,039.75 for lost wages and counseling costs, and an order for ML to complete sexual harassment prevention training. Read the full story.
8. Former Scotiabank mortgage specialist awarded $900,000 in defamation case after he was accused of fraud
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded over $900,000 to G.C., a former Bank of Nova Scotia employee, in a defamation case stemming from a SIFT alert that labeled him as engaging in mortgage fraud. The defamatory alert, which remained active until 2019, blocked G.C. from securing employment in the financial industry after his resignation in 2012. The court rejected the bank’s defenses of justification and qualified privilege, citing insufficient evidence to support its claims. The award included $175,000 in general and aggravated damages, $475,000 for lost income, $200,000 in punitive damages, and nearly $70,000 in prejudgment interest. Read the full story.
7. Fired CFO at City of Nanaimo awarded $650K, Tribunal says misconduct report was tainted by unconscious bias against Black men
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal awarded nearly $650,000 to V.M., a former CFO of the City of Nanaimo, after ruling his suspension and termination were discriminatory. V.M., a Black man born in Zimbabwe, was dismissed following allegations of misconduct tied to his use of a corporate credit card. The Tribunal found the City’s Misconduct Report, which influenced the decision, was tainted by unconscious racial bias. Contrasting treatment of another employee who violated similar rules underscored the bias. V.M. faced significant personal and professional fallout, with the Tribunal ordering compensation for lost wages, dignity, and legal expenses. Read the full story.
6. Ontario court orders TD Bank to produce unredacted complaints, workplace investigation documents
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD) to produce unredacted versions of employee complaints, a whistleblower complaint, and an investigation report in a wrongful dismissal lawsuit filed by former employee G.J. TD argued redactions were necessary to protect complainants’ confidentiality but failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify them. Associate Justice Jolley ruled that documents referenced in legal pleadings are deemed relevant and must be disclosed. The decision highlighted the balance between confidentiality and fairness, emphasizing the plaintiff’s right to test evidence. The court rejected TD’s reliance on confidentiality and PIPEDA as barriers to disclosure. Read the full story.
5. Toronto Metropolitan University’s use of lawyer-investigators violated collective agreement: Arbitrator
An arbitrator ruled that Toronto Metropolitan University breached its collective agreement and employment legislation by retaining external investigators with a solicitor-client relationship to the university, creating a reasonable apprehension of bias. The grievances, filed by the Toronto Metropolitan Faculty Association (TFA) on behalf of two professors, J.M. and E.V.D.M., highlighted concerns over impartiality. Arbitrator Mark Hart found the investigators’ roles incompatible with the independence required under the Ontario Human Rights Code and OHSA. He concluded that the university violated fair management practices and failed to conduct unbiased investigations, emphasizing the systemic implications for future procedures. No remedies were ordered. Read the full story.
4. Rewriting the rules: HR needs to review employment contracts in light of Dufault ruling, says Rudner
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s ruling in Dufault v. The Corporation of the Township of Ignace has significant implications for how termination clauses in employment contracts are interpreted. The court found termination provisions in Karen Dufault’s fixed-term contract unenforceable, citing language granting the employer “sole discretion” to dismiss employees as misaligned with Ontario’s Employment Standards Act (ESA). The ruling emphasized deficiencies in the contract’s termination and severance pay terms and highlighted the importance of aligning contract language with ESA requirements. Employment lawyer Stuart Rudner called the decision part of a growing trend of courts invalidating termination clauses. Read the full story.
3. Firing of Canada Post worker who was ‘uncivil’ and ‘insubordinate’ upheld by arbitrator
An arbitrator upheld Canada Post’s decision to terminate a worker for cause, citing a pattern of uncivil, insubordinate, and disruptive behavior despite the worker’s otherwise positive attributes. The termination followed multiple incidents, including aggressive verbal altercations and defiance of workplace rules. Notably, the worker used offensive language toward colleagues and supervisors, disregarded safety protocols, and escalated disputes instead of following grievance procedures. Medical evidence of an adjustment disorder was deemed insufficient to excuse the misconduct. The arbitrator emphasized the importance of civility and proper grievance channels, concluding that further corrective measures would be ineffective and the dismissal was warranted. Read the full story.
2. Shoppers Drug Mart facing class-action lawsuit over alleged misclassification of employees as independent contractors
A class-action lawsuit was filed against Shoppers Drug Mart, alleging the company misclassified former associates as independent contractors and terminated their employment without reasonable notice or compensation. Announced on March 5, 2024, by Siskinds LLP and Spiteri & Ursulak LLP, the lawsuit represents all former associates outside Québec whose relationships with Shoppers were terminated between 2006 and the certification date. The claim seeks damages for breach of contract and wrongful dismissal. It targets associates who had entered into agreements with Shoppers Drug Mart Inc. or Shoppers Drug Mart (London) Limited, aiming to recover compensation on their behalf. Read the full story.
1. Muslim woman awarded nearly $45,000 in Ontario workplace prayer accommodations case
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario awarded $44,625 to J.B., a former Energy Call Solutions (ECS) employee, after ruling that the Hamilton-based call centre had failed to accommodate her religious practices. J.B., a practicing Muslim, was denied schedule adjustments for Ramadan prayers and private prayer space. The Tribunal found her termination followed a discriminatory incident in which ECS’s owner interrupted her prayer and allegedly made offensive remarks. Adjudicator Mario Silva concluded that ECS had violated Ontario’s Human Rights Code, citing inadequate policies on religious accommodations. The award included $35,000 for injury to dignity and $9,625 for lost wages, plus interest if unpaid. Read the full story.
