Calgary’s unemployment rate continues to trend higher than the national average. It’s not because employers are terminating workers here at a higher rate. According to this article, it’s because people keep moving here faster than they can find jobs. I’m not sure that explanation is much better than the alternative, though: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-unemployment-canada-1.7400168

An interesting and well-reasoned decision considering to what extent a party whose pleadings were struck as a sanction for contempt may participate in the trial of the action. Granted, this arose in the context of a family law matter, but the reasoning should be applicable to employment litigation as well: Boyer v Boyer, 2024 ABKB 727

Some of the legislation introduced by the government of Alberta the past few months that we looked at earlier has now passed final reading and some of it is in force:

• Bill 24 – Alberta Bill of Rights Amendment Act, 2024 is in force effective December 5, 2024.
• Bill 33 – Protection of Privacy Act and Bill 34 – Access to Information Act both received Royal Assent on December 5 and will come into force upon proclamation.
• Bill 36 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 received Royal Assent on December 5 and will come into force on various dates.

Confederation College appealed a jurisdiction determination by an officer of Employment and Social Development Canada that held the Confederation College’s Aviation Centre for Excellence (“ACE”) was severable from the rest of the school and subject to federal jurisdiction because it engaged in the operation of aircraft and aircraft maintenance. In an interesting application of the functional test and the presumption of provincial regulation of labour relations, the Federal Court found the essential nature of the ACE is an educational program within Confederation College and therefore subject to provincial jurisdiction: Confederation College v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 1981

Via Professor David Doorey, Canada Post obtained an injunction prohibiting CUPW from picketing at a Purolator site in Scarborough on November 29, 2024, with written reasons released late last week: Purolator Inc. v. John Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 6812

Justice Thompson discusses language required in an employment contract to rebut the presumption an employee is entitled to reasonable notice of termination and considers the test to prove an employee failed to mitigate their damages in upholding the trial judge’s reasons on appeal: Plotnikoff v Associated Engineering Alberta Ltd, 2024 ABKB 706

Vice-Chair Scott discusses the meaning of “payroll error” and what deductions from an employee’s wage are and are not permitted: Building Works Ltd. o/a Building Works Remediation & Restoration v Nagy, 2024 ABESAB 20

The Director of the Alberta Human Rights Commission dismissed the complaint summarily. That decision was upheld by the Chief of the Commission on appeal. The Court of King’s Bench dismissed the Complainant’s application for judicial review. The Court of Appeal disagreed and ordered the matter go to a hearing with the Tribunal. The Court of Appeal found that whether the circumstances of the case gave rise to a duty to inquire is a central issue and is very fact-specific which required a hearing to resolve: Volpi v Alberta (Human Rights Commission), 2024 ABCA 401

In this decision resolving objections to a certification application, Vice-Chair Scott confirms that the Board is only concerned with determining if the proposed bargaining unit is AN appropriate bargaining unit for collective bargaining. It doesn’t need to be the MOST appropriate bargaining unit: Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3550 v Edmonton School District No. 7, 2024 ALRB 124

In the latest interim decisions, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal considers whether to bifurcate the lengthy hearing to determine the merits of the claim separately from remedy and whether to grant the Respondent’s application to summarily dismiss some of the allegations in the complaint. Partial summary dismissal decision: Elliott v Imperial Oil Limited, 2024 AHRC 150 Bifurcation decision: Elliott v Imperial Oil Limited, 2024 AHRC 143

An employee was terminated for cause largely for making audio recordings of conversations with other employees without their knowledge. The employer moved for summary judgment. The Applications Judge declined to order summary judgment, finding that the matter could not be resolved on the paper record alone because of the nature of the facts and credibility issues. The decisions contains some interesting reasoning on whether secret recordings can give rise to just cause: Wan v H&R Block Canada Inc., 2024 ABKB 734

The Alberta Human Rights Commission dismisses a complaint because the Complainant refused to sign a settlement document containing a non-disclosure provision following a verbal settlement at a conciliation meeting: Singh v Bissell Centre, 2024 AHRC 149