Canada: Year-End Review: Key Labour And Employment Decisions Of 2008

As the year draws to an end, the time is right to reflect on how the labour and employment landscape has changed over the last 12 months. Certainly, 2008 was marked by an abundance of significant decisions by courts and tribunals at all levels touching on a number of contentious labour and employment issues. In fact, we cannot remember a year in which the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) has rendered more employment-related judgments. To help put it all in perspective, what follows is an overview of the key decisions from 2008 — a "cheat sheet" of sorts — to help you navigate the road ahead.

Curbing Damages for Wrongful Dismissal

This year will certainly be remembered for the long-awaited SCC judgment in Keays v. Honda Canada Inc.1 Employers across the country breathed a sigh of relief as the SCC overturned the largest award of punitive damages in a wrongful dismissal action in Canadian history. The decision also clarified a number of important principles for employers, notably:

  • It limits the scope of damage awards in wrongful dismissal claims by doing away with the "Wallace bump-up" (i.e., extensions of a reasonable notice period as a result of bad faith conduct during termination). From now on, the employee will have to prove actual, compensable damages to justify such an award.
  • It limits the availability of punitive damage awards to exceptional cases, where the employer's "advertent wrongful acts ... are so malicious and outrageous that they are deserving of punishment in their own right."
  • It strengthens an employer's ability to manage absenteeism in the workplace by confirming an employer's right to monitor employees who are chronically absent from work.

The Keays judgment came on the heels of the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Mulvihill v. City of Ottawa, which also placed significant limits on the availability of bad faith or "Wallace damages" in wrongful dismissal cases.2

In Mulvihill, the court unanimously overturned the trial judge's award of Wallace damages. In doing so, the court rejected the notion that certain types of employer actions during the termination process (in this case, invoking cause for termination and later withdrawing it, and terminating the employee while on sick leave) will automatically give rise to Wallace damages. The court reinforced that an award of Wallace damages will only be made where sufficient evidence exists to justify making such an award.

In another landmark decision on wrongful dismissal damages, the SCC reaffirmed an employee's duty to minimize or mitigate the losses resulting from an unjust dismissal in Evans v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31.3

Going one step further, the SCC held that, in some circumstances, a dismissed employee could be required to return to work or remain at work for the same employer, in order to mitigate his or her damages. Put another way, an employer could satisfy its notice obligation by making a dismissed employee an offer to return to work for the balance of the notice period. The test for determining whether re-employment is an appropriate option is an objective one — would a reasonable person consider the offer as a legitimate employment opportunity? If the employee is offered a position at the same salary with similar benefits and status, and if the personal relationships haven't deteriorated to the point of hostility, and if no litigation has been brought, then the offer would likely be considered a reasonable one.

However, the court made a point of noting that damages awarded because the employer acted in bad faith in the manner of dismissal (i.e., "Wallace damages") are never subject to mitigation.

The Ongoing Debate over Drug and Alcohol Testing

The past year has been marked by controversy among Canadian courts over employee drug and alcohol testing, specifically for employees in safety-sensitive positions. The ongoing debate results from apparently inconsistent decisions from the courts in Ontario, Alberta and Québec.

In Chiasson v. Kellogg Brown & Root, the Alberta Court of Appeal upheld an employer's right to perform mandatory pre-employment alcohol and drug screening tests for safety-sensitive positions.4 Moreover, the court held that the recreational use of drugs and/or alcohol is not protected under human rights legislation because it does not constitute a disability. As a result, employers do not have a duty to accommodate in such cases.5

However, if the job applicant or employee is legitimately suffering a disability arising from an alcohol or drug addiction, then accommodation may still be required. This will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Finally, the court recognized that its ruling in Chiasson may be at odds with the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Entrop v. Imperial Oil Ltd., and, to the extent that this is so, declined to follow Entrop.

A few weeks earlier, the Québec Court of Appeal took a strikingly different approach. In Section locale 143 du Syndicat canadien des communications, de l'énergie et du papier v. Goodyear Canada inc., the court struck down the portion of an arbitrator's award that would have permitted an employer to conduct random alcohol and drug testing of its employees who work in safety-sensitive positions. Indeed, the court held that such testing was contrary to Québec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.6

These conflicting decisions mean that drug and alcohol testing of individuals in safety-sensitive or high-risk positions remains controversial and subject to numerous legal challenges. For employers in Québec and Ontario, it will now take very specific circumstances to get around the application of the positions taken by their courts.

New Limits Placed on the Employer's Duty to Accommodate a Disabled Employee

Employers have finally been given a break by the SCC when it comes to the extent of their duty to accommodate disabled employees. The judgment in Hydro-Québec v. Syndicat des employé-e-s de techniques professionnelles et de bureau d'Hydro-Québec, section locale 2000 (SCFP-FTQ) confirms that there is a limit on this duty. In order to establish undue hardship, an employer is not required to prove that it is impossible to accommodate the employee's characteristics, or that the employee will be totally unable to perform his or her work in the foreseeable future.7

Moreover, the SCC confirms that the following will constitute undue hardship:

  • a measure that would require an employer to modify working conditions in a fundamental way; or
  • a measure that would completely alter the essence of the employment contract (i.e., by negating the employee's obligation to perform work).

Further, the SCC judgment recognizes an employer's right to terminate employment when, despite the measures taken by the employer, the employee remains unable to resume his or her work for the reasonably foreseeable future.

Finally, the SCC found that an employer faced with a case of excessive absenteeism can take the entire situation into consideration, including the disabled employee's record and all of the efforts already made in assessing its duty to accommodate.

Further Restricting the Use of Criminal History in Hiring Decisions

In Montréal (City) v. Québec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse), the SCC held that refusing to hire on the basis of a criminal conviction for which a pardon has been obtained is discrimination under the Québec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and will only be justified where the employer can demonstrate exceptional circumstances.

In Québec, the Charter prohibits discrimination in employment "owing to the mere fact that [the individual] was convicted of a penal or criminal offence, if the offence was in no way connected with the employment or if the person has obtained a pardon for the offence." Despite this specific prohibition, the SCC conceded that an employer can consider the facts that led to the conviction in assessing whether a candidate has the qualifications required for a job, in particular where good moral character is a requirement for the position (in this case a constable with the Montréal police force).

However, once a pardon has been obtained, a presumption exists that the event should no longer reflect adversely on a person's character. Moreover, the decision not to hire cannot be based on the mere fact of the initial finding of guilt. As such, to justify invoking the pardoned offence to refuse employment on the basis of moral character, the employer's inquiry must uncover conduct or facts that, when considered in light of all of the circumstances, support a conclusion that the person is unfit for the job.

Changing the Standard of Judicial Review

Until recently, the general rule applied by courts sitting on judicial review was that if the administrative tribunal was in the best position to decide the question at issue, then the decision of the administrative tribunal had to be "patently unreasonable" for the court to strike it down. In other words, the court deferred to the expertise of the administrative tribunal and would only strike down the decision if no reasonable person would have come to the conclusion the tribunal did. The decision of the SCC in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick changes this by eliminating the "patently unreasonable" standard of review.8 From now on, decisions of administrative tribunals will be reviewed to determine simply whether they are "correct" or "reasonable."

The stated purpose for this move away from the established standards was to clarify the approach to be taken on judicial review and provide real guidance for litigators and courts. While the practical outcome of this decision remains to be seen, there is speculation that lower courts may see this change as a reason to give less rather than more deference to administrative agencies. This is because a court no longer has to find that the administrative tribunal's decision was "patently unreasonable" in order to intervene and reverse a decision.

Competition by Departing Employees

On October 9, 2008, the SCC issued its decision in RBC Dominion Securities Inc. v. Merrill Lynch Canada Inc.9 In this case, a manager from RBC "brazenly" organized a group departure, with himself and nearly all of the investment advisors and support staff of RBC's branches in Cranbrook and Nelson, B.C. going to work for RBC's direct competitor, Merrill Lynch Canada Inc., without giving any notice to RBC. Further, in the weeks leading up to their move, they surreptitiously removed or copied and sent to Merrill Lynch records of RBC's entire client base. RBC's operations in Cranbrook and Nelson were crippled.

On the positive side, this case confirms that non-fiduciary employees have the following duties:

  1. A duty to give reasonable notice of resignation — In this case, the former employees were ordered to pay damages of $40,000 for failure to give reasonable notice of termination of employment. This was the amount of profits they would have contributed to RBC during the 2.5-week notice period.
  2. A duty of good faith in the discharge of his or her employment contract — One of the RBC manager's job duties in this case was to retain the employees of RBC who were under his supervision. By organizing their mass departure, the manager breached his duty of good faith. Consequently, the trial judge awarded damages in the amount of $1,483,239 against him for the loss of profits RBC suffered as a result of his failure to perform his duties in good faith. This loss was based on a five-year period, discounted for various contingencies. The SCC upheld this part of the trial judge's award.
  3. A duty of confidentiality — The trial judge described the copying of RBC's client records as a "planned, prolonged, secret scheme to arrange a wholesale transfer of information to a competitor." The trial judge concluded that this conversion of RBC's records called for the imposition of punitive damages. It ordered Merrill Lynch to pay $250,000 in punitive damages, each of the former RBC investment advisors to pay $5,000 in punitive damages, and the former RBC manager to pay $10,000 in punitive damages.

The Court of Appeal upheld this award of punitive damages. However, the court did make it clear that the duty of confidentiality does not necessarily extend to preventing departing employees from taking their own client contact information, particularly where the client's interests so indicate.

On the downside, the SCC confirmed that former non-fiduciary employees have no legal duty not to compete unfairly against their former employer, even during the reasonable notice of resignation period. Therefore, if you are concerned about potential competition from departing employees, you should use restrictive covenant agreements, such as non-competition or non-solicitation agreements. These agreements must be reasonable with respect to the length of time and the geographic area in which the employee is prohibited from competing.

Looking Forward

As noted at the outset, this has been an especially fruitful year for important employment-related decisions, one that has been marked by an unprecedented number of significant judgments from the SCC. We have no reason to believe this trend will not continue. Already, the SCC has announced that it will hear the appeals of two former Wal-Mart employees alleging that they were terminated for union activities in the ongoing saga over the closure of the just-unionized Jonquière store in Québec. We will continue, as we always have, to keep you ahead of the curve by informing you about recent cases and developments as they occur.


1 For more information on Keays, see:

2 For more information on Mulvihill, see:

3 For more information on Evans, see:

4 For more information on Chiasson, see:

5 However, the court did note that discrimination based upon a perception of drug addiction can be a violation of human rights legislation. In this case, the employer did not have that perception.

6 For more information on Goodyear, see:

7 For more information on Hydro-Québec, see:

8 For more information on Dunsmuir, see:

9 For more information on RBC Dominion, see: and

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

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.