Thank you for your service. Lest we forget…

This one is not really employment-related, but it’s a good reminder to be careful when notarizing documents and be careful not to help further OPCA mumbo jumbo. After successfully appealing sanctions ordered by Justice Rooke, Justice Nixon imposed penalties following the conclusion of his process. Of note, one of the respondents in these matters got half the fine that Justice Rooke originally awarded and the other got the same amount: Akpan (Re), 2024 ABKB 651 (CanLII)

Normally, when the assets of a business are sold, the employees are constructively dismissed. Employment standards legislation contains provisions that deem employment to be continuous when the employees are retained by the purchaser such that their tenure with the vendor is recognized for the purpose of vacation entitlement and minimum termination notice. In this case, the exact closing date was a bit muddy and the Director of Employment Standards determined the closing date was five days before the employees were terminated by the vendor. As a result, the vendor was found liable for five days of unpaid wages plus termination pay for each employee. The issue here was whether the Director erred in that determination: Overstory Media Inc. (Re), 2024 BCEST 109 (CanLII)

The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal considers whether it can deal with an application to dismiss a complaint because it was filed outside the limitation period as a preliminary issue even if it was not addressed at the initial screening phase. Member Scott rules that the issue can be considered on a preliminary application, but ultimately finds that the complaint was timely: Onyschuk v City of Edmonton, 2024 AHRC 131 (CanLII)

Keeping with the human rights theme, no prima facie discrimination was found when the respondent refused to allow the complainant to do part-time, irregular work while off on maternity leave since the respondent treated all employees off on leave the same way: Trafford v ISCO Canada, Inc., 2024 AHRC 129 (CanLII)

In a hearing to assess damages against a defendant noted in default, the Alberta Court of Justice considered the impact of inducement (the plaintiff moved from Moncton to Westlock to take the job) on damages for wrongful dismissal and ordered “bad faith” damages for the manner of dismissal (in an amount that exceeded what the plaintiff requested) because the defendant refused to pay the amounts invoiced by the plaintiff and seemed to lead her on causing extreme anxiety: Rosenberg v Northern Nursing Solutions Inc., 2024 ABCJ 220 (CanLII)

The Alberta Court of King’s Bench dismissed an appeal against conviction and sentence under the Occupational Health and Safety Act related to the death of an employee of Inland Machine Services in 2019. The court found the trial judge properly applied the principles from the Court of Appeal decision in Precision Diversified Oilfield Services Corp to the general duty charge and the assessment of the due diligence defence. The Court also found that the sentencing judge was owed a great deal of deference and the conditions that existed at the time of sentencing, namely the lack of insight into the company’s role in the worker’s death, continued into the appeal: R v Inland Machining Services, 2024 ABKB 664 (CanLII)

The Alberta Court of King’s Bench dismisses an application for judicial review challenging a decision of the Board of Trustees of the Red Deer Separate School Division imposing sanctions on a Trustee for violation of the Education Act and the Board’s policies. The Trustee in question said the Holy Spirit told her to “go for it” and post a meme comparing LGBTQ pride to Nazi Germany. It’s not every day you see the Court faced with deciding whether meme posting contravenes Roman Catholic values: LaGrange v Red Deer Catholic Separate School Division, 2024 ABKB 665 (CanLII)

Some guy wrote about the ongoing Canada Post labour situation on Thursday: https://carbertwaite.com/news-legal-commentary/breaking-down-canada-posts-imminent-strike/

That guy was wrong about a rotating strike, though. A nationwide strike began just after midnight on the morning of November 15: https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/canada-post-workers-go-on-strike-friday-morning-disrupting-deliveries-1.7111281

Here’s a statement from CUPW on the strike: https://www.cupw.ca/en/statement-canadian-union-postal-workers-more-55000-postal-workers-strike

Here’s a statement from Canada Post in response to the strike: https://www.canadapost-postescanada.ca/cpc/en/our-company/news-and-media/corporate-news/negotiations/2024-11-15-cupw-announces-national-strike-that-will-cause-service-delays-for-canadians

And here’s what Labour Minister Steven MacKinnon had to say over on Twitter (I’m not calling it X, ever): https://x.com/stevenmackinnon/status/1857253622121198045

The Federal Court dismissed a mass tort claim brought by 330 members of the Canadian Armed Forces alleging a directive issued by the armed forces requiring members to be vaccinated against COVID-19 violated their Charter rights. In July 2023, a non-binding decision of the Military Grievances External Review Committee found the directive did violate the Charter rights of some members. Here, however, the Court found the pleading failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action: Qualizza v. Canada, 2024 FC 1801 (CanLII)