Sentences with phrase «time of one's dismissal»

A dismissed employee's reasonable notice period is determined at time of dismissal and not by the amount of time that it takes the employee to find employment.
However, the timing of the dismissal raised some questions among Democratic and even some Republicans lawmakers.
Yet, despite numerous efforts at the time of her dismissal, Perez - Melgosa failed to access university procedures that she believed could help her clear her name.
The opinion starts out by holding that the mortgage loan is reinstated by the involuntary dismissal, such that all payments that came due up to the time of the dismissal are wiped out, and the homeowner can start making the next monthly payment after the dismissal.
The Appellant (who at the time of his dismissal was the Regional Operations Manager) worked with a Human Resources Partner (Mr Briner).
The timing of her dismissal was the only element that seemed to support her claim.
Ontario courts have recognized that employees are particularly vulnerable at the time of dismissal.
Disability was later conceded, but the Tribunal found that the Force did not have knowledge of the disability at the time of dismissal.
Since 1997, When the Supreme Court presented Canadian workplaces with the Wallace decision, employers have had an obligation to play nice and behave well at the time of dismissal, or face paying additional «bad faith» damages to a former employee.
In addition to the unacceptable conduct the employer knew about at the time of dismissal, the employer at trial also argued that use of a company phone for a purpose that was never intended, that is recording conversations with senior management, was a deliberate violation of the employee's duty of confidentiality and a breach of trust and loyalty to the defendant.
As the Court reasoned, employees were particularly vulnerable at the time of dismissal and in need of additional protection.
It also illustrates the need for the employer to act humanely and fairly at the time of dismissal.
Before Keays, employers had an obligation to play nice and behave well at the time of dismissal, or face paying additional «bad faith» damages to a former employee.
M's ova had been fertilised but, at the time of her dismissal, her ova had not been transferred back into her uterus.
In a recent decision, Ozorio v. Canadian Hearing Society, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded 24 months» common law reasonable notice to a dismissed employee, Ms. Ozorio, who was 61 years old at the time of dismissal.
Chandran was an 18 year employee of the Bank who, at the time of dismissal, held the position of Senior Manager, which involved supervising 11 employees.
Be cautious about promising a date for living accommodations under a new contract for an incoming superintendent unless you are confident that the former superintendent will have moved out by the date specified at the time of dismissal.
Prior to 2008 courts in Canada followed the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. 4 and simply extend the dismissed employee's notice period of it where found that the employer had engaged in acts of bad faith at the time of dismissal.
The Supreme Court of Canada in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd1 set out examples of bad faith employer conduct at the time of dismissal that will justify an award of moral damages.
The requirement that an employee must prove that he or she suffered compensable mental distress as a result of the employer's bad faith conduct at the time of dismissal has made it more difficult for dismissed employee's to successfully claim moral damages.
Of real note is that at the time of her dismissal in May 2011, Ms. Strudwick was earning $ 12.85 per hour.
An employer's bad faith actions at the time of dismissal that triggers mental distress in the dismissed employee can result in an additional damage award
At the time of his dismissal, he was 50 years old and had been employed for two years and seven months.
Bad faith conduct includes situations in which the employer was untruthful, misleading or unduly insensitive at the time of dismissal.
Ontario courts tend to be protective of employees at the time of dismissal and try to prevent loss of severance in all but the clearest cases of serious misconduct.
He was a supervisor with nearly 17 years» service and was 48 years old at the time of his dismissal.
The plaintiff was 50 years old and had been employed be the defendant for 4 years in the position of senior vice president at the time of his dismissal.
In all of these decisions, the dismissed employee would likely have been required to accept offers of re-employment had the employer not made negative allegations about the employee at the time of dismissal.
The plaintiff had worked for the employer for 33 years and was 53 years old at the time of his dismissal.
This is established by having the future employee sign an employment contract that contains a termination clause that either sets out a different notice period or provides a formula for calculating the employee's notice period at the time of dismissal.
At the time of his dismissal, Canac paid the plaintiff the statutory minimum payment representing 31.79 weeks» notice and severance pursuant to its obligations under the ESA.
At the time of his dismissal he weighed some 160 kg, being a shade over 25 stone, or about the same as an ostrich.
[The claimant] may well gain the sympathy of the [Employment Tribunal] so that it is carried along the acquittal route and away from the real question — whether the employer acted fairly and reasonably in all the circumstances at the time of the dismissal
At the time of his dismissal from employment, Mr. Wellman was provided with two weeks pay in lieu of notice, ostensibly in accordance with the terms of his employment contract with The Herjavec Group.
At the time of his dismissal, the complainant had been employed by the employer for less than one year.
Finally, with respect to the character of the Plaintiff's employment, Justice Aitken gave little credence to the Defendant's argument that because Mr. Wellman was not supervising any people at the time of dismissal he could not be a «manager.»
These facts would have to be known after the dismissal, support misconduct serious enough to warrant an immediate dismissal, and exist at the time of dismissal.
It established that an employee may be dismissed summarily for gross misconduct, and critically that an employer can defend a claim for wrongful dismissal by reliance on facts not known at the time of dismissal.
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z