Employment Law Newsletter - Fall 2007

bãéäçóãÉåí=i~ï
[ LEGAL ISSUES OF INTEREST TO EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES ]=
Volume 17, No. 2
Fall 2007
“Blackballing” former employees:
when is this unlawful?
Pages 59-61
overturned that element of the trial judge’s decision.
The Court of Appeal concluded that it was
inappropriate to extend the application of the tort to
cover breaches of internal policies on the
circumstances of this case. In other words, a breach
of an internal policy is not, without more, an “illegal
or unlawful” act.
Circumstances often arise when a company does not
wish to be affiliated with a particular individual.
This individual may be a former employee with
whom the company had a tumultuous relationship, or
a third party who has caused difficulties for the
company in the past. The company can, of course,
refuse to hire this individual as an employee without
fear of liability. However, companies have also
attempted to prevent their contractors or affiliates
from employing that individual as well. The Ontario
Court of Appeal has recently affirmed that these
efforts can lead to liability on the part of the
company.
In the end, however, Cogeco did not escape liability.
The Court of Appeal found that all four elements of
the related tort of inducing breach contract were
satisfied on the evidence, namely:
1.
2.
Mr. Drouillard had a valid and enforceable
contract with Mastec;
Cogeco was aware of the existence of this
contract;
Congeco intended to and did procure the breach
of the contract; and
As a result of the breach, Mr. Drouillard suffered
damages.
In Drouillard v. Cogeco Cable Canada Inc.1, Cogeco
Cable Canada did not want a former employee (Mr.
Drouillard) working on its cable equipment, even on
behalf of a contractor. Therefore, when Cogeco
discovered that Mr. Drouillard had been hired by one
of its contractors (Mastec), it advised Mastec that Mr.
Drouillard would not be permitted to work on any of
Cogeco’s property. Mastec therefore terminated Mr.
Drouillard’s employment on his first day of work.
Mr. Drouillard sued Cogeco for interference with his
contractual and economic relations.
3.
Cogeco had an internal policy stating that it could
refuse to work with a contractor when there was
“reasonable cause.” The trial judge concluded that
breaching this policy was an “unlawful act” giving
rise to liability for the tort of interference with
economic relations. The Court of Appeal, however,
In another case, a company successfully defended
against a similar claim because they were justified in
their refusal to be affiliated with a particular
individual. In Even v. Al Israel Airlines Ltd.,2 El Al
Airline advised future employer travel agencies that it
would terminate agreements with them if they
1
4.
A defendant liable for inducing a breach of contract
can plead justification in certain circumstance. But
here the court found that Cogeco could not avail itself
of the defence based on the findings that it had acted
maliciously. Mr. Drouillard was awarded damages of
approximately $107,000 by the Court of Appeal.
2
[2007] O.J. No. 1664 (Ont. C.A.)
[2006] O.J. No. 71.
59
Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP
www.nelligan.ca
[ OTTAWA ] 66 Slater, Suite 1900, Ottawa, ON K1P 5H1, Tel: (613) 238 8080, Fax: (613) 238 2098, TDD/ATS: (613) 563 4960
[ KINGSTON ] The Woolen Mill, 4 Cataraqui, Suite 202, Kingston, ON K7K 1Z7, Tel: (613) 531 7905, Fax: (613) 531 0857
[ VANKLEEK HILL ] 86 High Street, Vankleek Hill, ON K0B 1R0, Tel: (613) 678 2490, Toll Free: (877) 678 2490, Fax: (613) 678 3762
[ ALEXANDRIA ] 139 Main South, Alexandria, ON K0C 1A0, Tel: (613) 525 2396, Fax: (613) 525 2752
Nelligan O'Brien Payne – Employment Law Newsletter
employed the plaintiff. Unlike in Drouillard, the
court made a clear finding that the actions of the
airline were justified. The court found that the
plaintiff had previously been dishonest in handling
trust funds resulting in a financial loss to the
defendant airline of $700,000.00. The airline was
entitled to protect itself from the risk of future losses
by refusing to do business with businesses employing
Even where he could put the airline at risk of future
losses again.
Fall 2007
stipule que l’employeur doit accorder des pausesrepas d’au moins 30 minutes à l’employé pour tout
quart de plus de cinq heures. L’article 21 précise que
l’employeur n’est pas tenu de rémunérer un employé
pour les pauses-repas.
La Ville d'Ottawa a soulevé l'argument que la
convention collective prévoyait un avantage
supérieur à la norme d'emploi, soit la rémunération
d'un employé pour ses pauses-repas et donc, le
paragraphe 20(1) de la LNE ne s'applique pas.
L’arbitre a rejeté l’argument de la Ville d’Ottawa en
indiquant que la disposition du contrat traite de
matière différente que la norme. L’employeur ne peut
donc se soustraire à la norme.
The court also concluded that the airline had not gone
so far as to prevent the plaintiff from working in the
travel industry field, that is to say “blackballing him.”
The plaintiff could still work in his chosen
profession. What he could not do was sell El Al
Airline tickets.
La Ville d’Ottawa s’est aussi fondée sur l’article 21
de la LNE en stipulant qu’un employeur n’est pas
tenu de rémunérer un employé pendant une pauserepas. Selon la Ville d’Ottawa, la LNE prévoit que
les interruptions durant les pauses-repas peuvent être
compensées en rémunérant les employés. L’arbitre
était d’avis que lorsque possible, il fallait refixer la
pause-repas de l’employé afin de lui accorder 30
minutes consécutives.
Employers who communicate negative opinions or
information about former employees to a third party,
causing the third party to refrain from hiring, rehiring
or to breach a contract of employment, should act
scrupulously and first consult with counsel. Former
employers should ensure that the communication is
justified, supportable and for a legitimate purpose. If
a court concludes the purpose was not legitimate and
was simply directed at injuring the plaintiff and that
harm was caused, then the former employee may well
have a successful claim against the former employer.
À la lumière de ce qui précède, il faut retenir que la
pause-repas prévue à la LNE doit être d’une durée de
30 minutes sans interruption. Dans la mesure où il y a
interruption, la pause-repas doit être refixée ailleurs
pendant le quart de travail de l’employé.
Rob Monti
[email protected]
Nota : Dans ce document, l’emploi du masculin pour
désigner des personnes n’a d’autres fins que celles
d’alléger le texte
Obligations de l'employeur en ce qui a
trait aux pauses-repas
Julie Skinner
[email protected]
Il s’agit d’une demande de contrôle judiciaire de la
décision d’un arbitre qui s’était penché sur un grief
déposé par le syndicat, alléguant que la Ville
d’Ottawa avait omis d’accorder des pauses-repas sans
interruption à des auxiliaires médicaux,
contrairement à la Loi sur les normes d’emploi (la
« LNE »).3 La nature du travail d’un auxiliaire
médical dicte un horaire de travail avec des
interruptions. Ainsi, il n’existe aucune certitude que
les auxiliaires médicaux puissent bénéficier de
pauses-repas sans interruption.
Pension pamphlets can be legally
binding
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal has recently ruled
that a pension information package provided to
employees regarding the calculation of their pension
entitlements constituted an “offer” that created
“binding legal obligations”.4
En vertu du paragraphe 5(2) de la LNE, si une
disposition d’un contrat d’emploi prévoit un avantage
supérieur, cette disposition s’applique et non pas la
norme d’emploi. Le paragraphe 20(1) de la LNE
In September of 1998, an information package was
sent to all municipal employees in Halifax inviting
them to participate in a new, merged pension plan.
The individualized information packages contained
an outline of the employee’s personal data for
3
4
Ottawa (City) c. Ottawa-Carleton Public Employees
Union, Local 503, [2007] O.J. No. 1339.
White v. Halifax Regional Municipality Pension
Committee 2007 N.S.C.A. 22
60
Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP
www.nelligan.ca
[ OTTAWA ] 66 Slater, Suite 1900, Ottawa, ON K1P 5H1, Tel: (613) 238 8080, Fax: (613) 238 2098, TDD/ATS: (613) 563 4960
[ KINGSTON ] The Woolen Mill, 4 Cataraqui, Suite 202, Kingston, ON K7K 1Z7, Tel: (613) 531 7905, Fax: (613) 531 0857
[ VANKLEEK HILL ] 86 High Street, Vankleek Hill, ON K0B 1R0, Tel: (613) 678 2490, Toll Free: (877) 678 2490, Fax: (613) 678 3762
[ ALEXANDRIA ] 139 Main South, Alexandria, ON K0C 1A0, Tel: (613) 525 2396, Fax: (613) 525 2752
Nelligan O'Brien Payne – Employment Law Newsletter
pension purposes, including the date upon which the
individual joined the existing plan, the years of
credited service and the total annual pension accrued
to April 1998. Employees were to elect one of three
options based on these packages. After doing so, the
Plaintiff received notification that his total credited
service was less than that initially provided in the
information package, now using the reduced formula.
The Plaintiff and three others sued the Pension
Committee for breach of contract.
Nelligan O’Brien Payne is a multi-service law
firm with offices in Ottawa, Kingston, Vankleek
Hill and Alexandria. We have over 40 talented
lawyers and consultants whom you can ask for
advice in these key areas:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal concluded that the
information package constituted an “offer” that
created “binding legal obligations”. However, the
Court of Appeal concluded that the information
package did not give employees the right to have
their service credited at the higher rate (as stated in
the information package) for five reasons:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Fall 2007
the details in the information package were
qualified;
throughout the package employees were urged to
get more information under the bolded heading
“What You Need to Do”;
the incorrect information contained in the
information package did not negatively affect the
choice they made – other options were no better;
there was no reference to DTS in the plan
comparison sheet; and
the total annual pension accrued amount was
based on the correct discounted formula.
Business Law
Class Actions
Condominium Law
Employment Law
Estate Planning and Administration
Family Law
Financial Institutions
Insurance Defence
Intellectual Property
Labour Law
Litigation
Municipal Law
Personal Injury and Wrongful Death
Public Law and Regulatory Affairs
Real Estate and Development
Technology Law
To obtain copies of this publication, please
contact Ann Milks at [email protected].
The information package alone did not give the
employees the right to have their previous employer
service credited fully to the new pension design,
where it had been discounted in the past.
Employment Law is not intended to provide
legal advice or opinion as neither can be given
without reference to specific events and
situations.
Ella Forbes-Chilibeck
[email protected]
Our Employment Law Practice Group
Questions and comments concerning materials in
this newsletter are welcomed.
Janice Payne
Dougald Brown
Christopher Rootham, Editor,
[email protected].
Steve Waller
Sean McGee
Denise Workun
Ainslie Benedict
Robert Monti
Christopher Rootham
Mark Seebaran
StevenLevitt
Julie Skinner
Ella Gorbes-Chilibeck
Copies of this newsletter are also posted on our
Web site at www.nelligan.ca.
© Copyright 2007 Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP
Adrian Ishak
61
Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP
www.nelligan.ca
[ OTTAWA ] 66 Slater, Suite 1900, Ottawa, ON K1P 5H1, Tel: (613) 238 8080, Fax: (613) 238 2098, TDD/ATS: (613) 563 4960
[ KINGSTON ] The Woolen Mill, 4 Cataraqui, Suite 202, Kingston, ON K7K 1Z7, Tel: (613) 531 7905, Fax: (613) 531 0857
[ VANKLEEK HILL ] 86 High Street, Vankleek Hill, ON K0B 1R0, Tel: (613) 678 2490, Toll Free: (877) 678 2490, Fax: (613) 678 3762
[ ALEXANDRIA ] 139 Main South, Alexandria, ON K0C 1A0, Tel: (613) 525 2396, Fax: (613) 525 2752