We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
An Ontario arbitrator has found that an employer violated Bill
168 which introduced workplace violence provisions into
Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act.
The Labourers' International Union of North America, Local
506, referred a workplace violence grievance to the Ontario Labour
Relations Board. For some reason, the employer did not file the
necessary response form with the OLRB. As such, the OLRB proceeded
to hear the grievance without the employer having filed any
materials.
On the basis of the facts stated by the union, the OLRB found
that a principal of the employer had assaulted, on a job
site, a labourer employed by the employer, and that the
principal later threatened another worker with physical violence
and death.
The OLRB also found that the employer had failed to prepare,
review and post workplace violence and harassment policies or
programs, or to provide information and instruction to workers
regarding workplace harassment, in violation of sections of the
Occupational Health and Safety Act that were introduced in Bill
168.
The OLRB therefore directed the employer to "cease and
desist from violating . . . the provisions of the Occupational
Health and Safety Act."
While the union also asked the OLRB to award damages –
including for mental distress – to the employees who were the
victims of workplace violence, the OLRB said that it did not have
sufficient evidence to do so, but the OLRB scheduled a date to deal
with the assessment of damages.
Although the employer did not participate in this grievance
hearing, the decision is a warning to employers that non-compliance
with the Bill 168 workplace violence and harassment provisions is
not just a technical breach, but may result in legal orders and
damages.
FMC is one of Canada's leading business and litigation law
firms with more than 500 lawyers in six full-service offices
located in the country's key business centres. We focus on
providing outstanding service and value to our clients, and we
strive to excel as a workplace of choice for our people. Regardless
of where you choose to do business in Canada, our strong team of
professionals possess knowledge and expertise on regional, national
and cross-border matters. FMC's well-earned reputation for
consistently delivering the highest quality legal services and
counsel to our clients is complemented by an ongoing commitment to
diversity and inclusion to broaden our insight and perspective on
our clients' needs. Visit:
www.fmc-law.com
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The Federal Court of Appeal recently weighed in to reconcile competing tests on the proper way to determine whether an individual is a contractor or truly an employee.
A discussion on a recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal, which confirms that the central question is, whether the person is performing the services as his own business, on his own account.
Back in July 2012, we covered "PVYW v Comcare" (No 2), [2012] FCA 395, which concerned an employee in the HR department of an Australian government agency who was injured on a work-related trip to a country town in New South Wales.
The employee, Ashworth, alleged that the manager demanded that she close the door and then positioned herself in front of the closed door and started screaming and pointing her finger in the employee’s face.
Some organizations subscribe to the close your eyes and think good thoughts school of drafting, when it comes to non-competition agreements in employment contracts.
A discussion on the judicial decision in a recent case, where a BC employer has successfully defended a claim for constructive dismissal despite taking away supervisory duties and moving the employee from an office to a cubicle.
Employment: What Should Be On Your Radar Screen For 2012? - Video
