[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Early Return from Maternity Leave #87149

I believe so but I need to run this past our payroll expert, Alan McEwen. Get back to u as soon as I can. Sorry to wait 4 days and look at the Q at the end of the day Friday. . . Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for COMPLIANCE #87142

There are definitely firms that do this, including I suspect ADP and the other payroll vendors. But I can’t vouch for any of them. Here are a couple of leads you can check out:
https://www.peocanada.com/
https://www.bromelin.ca/
https://www.trinet.com/
Hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for In Ontario, does vacation time and vacation pay accrue during an unpaid leave of absence i.e. parental leave or medical leave? #87141

From our payroll expert, Alan McEwen:
By default, if the vacation promise is paid time off work (as opposed to vacation pay calculated as a percentage of earnings), then the leaves provided for in the Ontario employment standards are time that accrue the right to vacation.
However, employers can modify the promise so that the right to accrue paid vacation time is restricted to active service. You just can’t pick and choose the types of inactive service that are excluded. That would run afoul of the Human Rights legislation in Ontario.
***
Hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for On call Question #87140

Seems like there is more to this question than is being communicated. Is the foreman considered a manager and not illegible for overtime? did the foreman take the “extra pay” because everyone else on the crew opted out of being “on call?”
If it is a case where the foreman is “robbing” the rest of the crew of the potential to earn overtime, this could be a bad situation for the city, especially if the foreman sets the schedule. What could have initially been a case of the foreman “doing everyone a favour” or “falling on the sword” for the crew, could very well be perceived, maybe rightfully so, as scheduling bias and favoritism. This would have a big impact on workplace culture, respect, and could make the city liable for wage discrepencies because of the inequitable scheduling… especially if it is unionized labour.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for extended health benefits premium changes employee and employer 3 months #87148

Although you have communicated that changes can take place at the company’s discretion for operational needs – if push came to shove, you could be in a difficult situation having to prove the operational need. This proof could be at the cost of a civil case and all the associated costs with a legal action. It is highly likely that any mediator or court would default to “reasonable notice” and whether or not that was given. Of course “reasonable notice” is difficult to determine because it is dependent on the severity, need, and operational costs or undue hardship to the company.
In this case, it is not unreasonable to default to as much notice as possible, especially given the effect to employees take home pay and benefits. Employees might need time to consider signing up to a partner’s plan in the event that they opted out because yours was better at the time. They may also need time to consider the slight impact to their take-home pay and what, if any, concessions need to be made.
It would not be unreasonable to give as much notice as possible and afford some transition concessions if need be. In this case, 90 days notice would be, at a minimum, a reasonable notification period.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for In Ontario can an employee quit and give too much notice #87139

No, you cannot give just the 2 weeks. The employee gave 30 day’s notice, if you told him that he did not need to serve out the notice period, you are required to pay him for the entirety of that notice period; unless the employee agrees to change his notice or accepts two weeks. You would want this to be documented, agreed upon and signed.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for BC contract updates for a contractor #87138

Yes, you are not required to extend for the same term, but you should communicate the issue to the contractor to avoid the potential misinterpretation that you are trying to give 30 days notice.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Employee attendance issues during 3 month probation period #87147

As the employee is in his probationary period and you did communicate the attendance policy, there is little risk in letting this employee go. However, we would recommend that you focus on this being an attendance issue and not because he was sick. You may also want to request a doctor’s note. If the employee in question is legitimately ill with a serious medical condition it may be perfectly reasonable that they are not at work, but it does place an unnecessary burden on the employer given the recency of his hire and the inability to train the employee.
You cannot terminate an employee for being sick. You cannot issue progressive discipline for an employee being sick. You can however do both for attendance issues.
But again, this is moot given the probationary period, provided you have a clause in your employment offer that clearly defines the probationary period.
If you are afraid of repercussions, we would recommend asking for a medical note first – but it seems like a decision has been made already, and it isn’t unreasonable to want to terminate a new employee that has missed 60% of their workdays since being hired.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Application to for Union Certification Received today. Next steps? #87137

Yes, the OLRB has an Information Bulletin that explains the steps of union certification. The employer stuff begins on page 5. http://www.olrb.gov.on.ca/english/infob/infbul01.pdf   If you have any Qs, suggest you call the OLRB directly. Hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for What is the HR best practice for a respectful workplace case – can the employer suspend the employee without pay during the investigative process as it is a risk to have them on site? #87136

Generally think it’s a bad idea to suspend an employee pending an investigation because it opens you to due process and procedural unfairness claims. In other words, should presume employees are innocent unless and until you do a fair and thorough investigation and determine that they did commit the offence. Suspending while the investigation reverses the presumption and punishes the accused because of the accusation.The other problem with the suspension is that the employee should be available to interview as a witness during the investigation. If you don’t get the employee’s side of the story, the investigation isn’t fair.
Having said that, let me add that all bets are off if the issue is one of safety. If the employee poses a risk of violence, the first priority is to protect your workers. Use sound judgment. If you’re worried about the interaction between the accuser and accused during the investigation, there may be better ways to keep them separate without suspending the accused.
Great Q and I hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Notice before quitting #87146

Alan, the payroll expert, agrees with my answer above. Only 2 weeks notice required. One issue that might be less clear is whether you have to allow the worker to work during the notice period. But, again, that would apply only for 2, rather than 4 weeks.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Notice before quitting #87145

I’m pretty sure you’d only have to give him the required 2 weeks. Logically, there’s no way the ESA would allow employees to unilaterally increase their own termination notice entitlement by giving longer notice of their intention to quit. But there may be something I’m missing so I’m going to run this Q past our payroll expert, Alan McEwen. Will let u know when I hear back.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Short-Term Disability Benefits (as salary continuance) Vacationable? #87135

Here’s Alan’s response. Hope it helps. Glenn

The question is really what the vacation promise is.
If this is so many days or weeks of paid vacation, accrued based on active service, then there would be no requirement to accrue this time when the person is off on STD.
However, if the promise is vacation pay at some percent, then if the contact of employment includes the provision of STD benefits, then these benefits would be vacationable in Ontario, for example. However, STD benefits would not be vacationable in BC, where the vacation promise is a percent of vacationable earnings.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for AandD Testing, LOA #87144

If an employee is on a leave covered by the Employment Standards Act, their employment is considered continuous:

1. The employee continues to get any wage or benefit increases that they would normally receive
2. Employers continue to make payments to benefit plans – unless the employee doesn’t want to continue with a plan or if they take reservist’s leave
3. Employers continue to calculate annual vacation, termination entitlements, pension, benefits or length of service the same as if they normally would

Given LOA is considered continuous employment, and employee would be accountable for the same re-testing as if they were not on leave; however, if the testing interval should have occurred while on LOA, they would be required to take it upon resumption of work.

You cannot force an employee to take testing while on LOA.

However, if the testing is tied to certification and a requirement of employment – say a welding certificate for example – the employee could be held to maintain their certificates as a condition of employment.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Short-Term Disability Benefits (as salary continuance) Vacationable? #87134

Just forwarded your follow-up to Alan. Will let u know when he responds–he’s in BC so it may not be for another few hours.

[Author]

Posts