Study Guides (248,297)
Canada (121,466)
York University (10,193)
HRM 3420 (16)
Midterm

Employment Law Cases for midterm.docx

9 Pages
518 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Human Resources Management
Course
HRM 3420
Professor
Chris Sweeney
Semester
Winter

Description
Law Cases Lecture 1 - introduction (pg 3 - 9, 17 - 25, 75 - 81) Jantunen vs. Ross (1991)  Ross borrowed money from employers, never paid them back.  They wanted to seize 20% of wages (as allowed by law) but also tips, claiming they shouldnt be included in the 20% Decision  Although tips are not mentioned in the wages act, they qualify as wages and are protected Toronto Electric Commisioners vs Snider (1925) decision  federal government only has control over 10% of business(banks, airlines etc) rest is provincial British columbia (Public service employee relations comission) vs. BCGSEU (1999)  known as the Meiorin case  female firefighter could not meet the physical fitness standards and was dismissed Decision  They had to accommodate a group that was negatively effected by work rule (course was hard) Belton vs. Liberty Insurance Co. of Canada (2004)  Plaintiffs were sales agents who although only sold Liberty products, signed as independent contractors  Defendants bought prudential, introduced new compensation package which defendants refused to sign  Defendant were fired and then they sued for wrongful dismissal Decision  courts found that they were in fact employees, based on facts of case not terms of contract Dynamex Canada Inc vs. Mamona  Successfully claimed to be independent contractor for income tax purposes  Successfully claimed to be employee for purpose of claiming holiday and vacation pay under ESL Lecture 2 - Common Law at the Hiring Stage (pg 30, chapter 3) Christie vs. York corp. (1940)  went to a bar after a hockey game in montreal, refused service because he's coloured.  Christie sued for 200 for humiliation, bartender argued it was in the interests of the bar Decision  At the time, refusal to serve an individual based on race was legal. freedom of choice for tavern Cornell vs. Rogers Cablesystems inc. (misrepresentation by job candidates)  Applicant stated they were still hired with previous employer when in truth they were dismissed Decision  termination was justified (for misleading employers) Earle vs. Grant Transport (misrepresentation by job candidates)  Employee sued for wrongful dismissal after being let go for implying his previous salary was greater than it really was. he was dismissed without notice Decision  the innuendo made was not sufficiently misleading to support dismissal without notice Queen vs. Cognos (1993) (Negligent Misrepresentation)  Queen moved to Otttawa for position being told he could lead a major project  Employer failed to inform him the project was not guaranteed and still waiting funding approval Decision  employer breached duty of care and owed queen 50k for loss of income, and damages Treaty Group Inc. vs. Drake International Inc (2007)  Treaty hired drake's recommended Candidate for a position (Ms. Simpson)  Treaty discovered she had defrauded the organization over 263k and had been criminally convicted twice in the past.  Treaty sued drake for negligent misrepresentation and negligent reference checking Decision  Drake was held liable for both however damages were limited to 50% (263k) because treaty could have avoided issue with better supervision (contributory negligence) Egan vs. Alcatel Canada Inc. (2004) (Aggressive Recruiting)  Egan left job for another position after being convinced by 2 prior coworkers (who were being compensated for recruiting Egan)  Both sides anticipated lengthy period of employment  Egan was let go 2 years later and given a severance package of 12weeks in lieu of notice Decision  Egan was unaware her prior coworkers had incentive to convince her  court awarded her 9 months pay in lieu of notice (based on term spent at old company) Downey vs. 502377 Ontario Ltd. (Negligent Hiring)  2 bouncers beat up a patron at a bar severly, one bouncer had a history of violent actions. Decision  Certain jobs require higher standard of care (jobs with more risk). Bar was liable. Lecture 3 - The employment Contract (chptr 4, chapter 11 pgs 311-319) RBC Dominion Securities Inc. vs. Merrill Lynch Canada inc.  no facts, representation of implied terms and giving employers(ee) reasonable notice Francis vs. CIBC (Lack of consideration)  employee accepted employment and started working before signing contract Decision  CIBC couldn't rely on 3 month notice clause in contract because no new consideration was given Wallace vs. TD Bank (inequality of bargaining power)  court of appeal rejected argument that the agreement of 4 week termination notice for an 8 year serving employee was invalid. Wallace argued unequal bargaining power. Decision  Court found no special circumstances (lack of understanding or oppressive conduct) that undermined the contract. Irrcher vs. Mi Developments(2003) (Obsolescence)  Irrcher signed a contract restricting his termination notice period to 6 months.  After that, Irrcher took on many new responsibilities not outlined in the contract  upon termination, he received his 6 months notice Decision  Courts found that because Irrcher had experienced a fundamental change in the nature of his job, the original contract was no longer valid, and he received damages for reasonable notice. Machtinger vs. HOJ Industries Ltd. (1992) (Failure to meet minimum statutory standards)  Contract expressed 2 weeks termination notice when Employment Standards act requires 4. Decision  contract must meet minimum requirements. Court followed common law and awarded 7.5 months notice rather than the 4 weeks minimum in the Employment Standards Act. Foreman vs. 818329 Ontario Ltd. (2003) (Use of Ambiguous Language)  Foreman, manager of 2 bingo halls, asked current owners to draw up contract that would provide her with some security, as the ownership was changing hands  Contract stated that she could not dismissed  upon dismissal 9 months later, sued for earnings she would have received over lifespan Decision  the contract contained no explicit language that unequivocally guaranteed employment for life  she was awarded only 30,800 in liu of the 12 month reasonable notice she was entitled to. Ceccol vs. Ontario Gymnastics Federation(2001) (term contracts)  Ceccol was given 16 straight, 1 year contracts at a gymnastics club  upon dismissal, she received notice period for 1 year, rather than 16 Decision  the court claimed you can't hide behind terminology and granted reasonable notice of 16 months for her 16 years of employment  the sentence was reduced to 12 months for her failure to mitigate damages. Christiansen vs. Family Counselling Centre of Sault Ste. Marie and District (termination)  She worked as a therapist with employer for 7 years, and received 10 weeks pay on termination  the contract referred to the staff manual, which was not sent with the letter of offer, but which she received during her first week of work. the provisions in the manual were not explained to her Decision  The employer should have expressed it's intentions and the court found that the clause of reasonable notice was ambiguous. The court awarded Christensen 8 months pay in lieu. Shafrom vs. KRG Insurance Brokers (western) Inc. (restrictive covenants)  the covenant prohibited the defendant from competing with the employer for 3 years after leaving its employ Decision  the judge refused to enforce the covenant Daley vs. Depco International Inc. (employee policy)  Employee was dismissed for violating conduct in the employee manual  employer distributed handbook to all employee's and had sign offs that acknowledged receipt Decision  Employer had adequate reason to dismiss employee Wronko vs. Western Inventory Service Ltd. (2008)  Wronko, had received numerous contracts through his time with the organization, the last one being signed in 2000 offering him a lump sum payment of 2years salary upon termination  in 2002, employer tried to change the contract and lower the payment, wronko denied.  in 2004, employer stated the contract goes in to effect and if wronko declines, he's fired Decision
More Less

Related notes for HRM 3420

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit