[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Alberta #87045

Me again. Should have added that you can get around the PIPA issues by asking employees to indicate their allergies without disclosing their identities. PHI, in other words, is protected only when it can be traced to an identifiable individual. If that’s not possible, asking about allergies for EAP purposes would probably be OK under PIPA as long as you:

• Ask only for the info you need to make decisions on EAP coverage
• You tell employees why you’re collecting the info and how you intend to use it

Good luck and I hope that helps.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Alberta #87044

Employees’ personal health information is protected by privacy laws (in Alberta, The Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA)) BUT employers may collect, use and disclose it if:

• The purpose of the collection, disclosure or use is to comply with the law or create, manage or terminate an employment relationship and manage a post-employment relationship
• The collection, disclosure or use is reasonably necessary to carry out the above purpose
• The amount of info collected, disclosed or used is kept to the minimum necessary to accomplish that purpose
• You provide the employee reasonable notice of the personal information you’re collecting/using/disclosing and the purpose of the collection/use/disclosure
• You take appropriate measures to keep the info secure so others can’t use it without authorization

Same basic rules apply in BC, QC and at federally-regulated companies.
Hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Garnishment of wages – Notice from Employer to Employee #87043

Alan’s response: The garnishment notice itself will give a date from which any payments must be garnished. If there is no such date, the garnishment is effective from the date received.
Hope that answers your Q. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Just Cause for a Safety Violation #87042

Great Q. You need documentation showing:

1. You had a clear rule
2. You communicated the rule to the employee and he knew about it
3. The employee violated the rule
4. Other employees have been fired for the same violation–or other documentation showing that you consistently enforced the rule and weren’t just singling out this guy
5. Other prior progressive disciplinary actions, if any, taken against the employee for previous violations, e.g., warning letters, suspension notices, etc.

Hope that helps and sorry I took so long to reply. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Seasonal employees, temporary layoffs, job abandonment, dismissals #87041

Q1: You’re not legally required to list a specific term in the contract but it’s highly advisable that you do so.
Q2: Yes, if: A. the contract specifically says the work is seasonal; and B. the work really is permanent. Ditto if the work is probationary and the probationary period has passed under ESA.
Q3 and Q4: I’ll  have to run the rest of the Qs past our payroll expert.
Q5: Time necessary to constitute job abandonment depends on the situation and would be much shorter for seasonal employment. What is clear, though, is that you do need to be able to document that you made an effort to contact the employee. Suggest sending a written notice documenting the absence, when it began, how long it’s continued and seeking clarification of his/her status as well as a reply deadline after which you will assume the employee has abandoned the position.
Q6: Generally speaking, previous disciplinary notices don’t have a defined shelf life, particularly when the latest offence is a repeat violation, i.e., the same violation the employee committed before. Exception: Many unions negotiate clauses into collective agreements providing that previous discipline DOES expire, i.e., gets tossed from the file, after a stated period, typically around 2 years.
Q7: Face to face is generally preferable. It’s not so much a legal requirement as the optics. Phoning a firing looks pretty crass, especially if the employee has long service. Doing it in person also enables you to get the severance paperwork signed. Exception where phone may be OK is where there are mass layoffs and you can’t personally talk to everyone or if you’re worried about the threat of violence.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Orientation/ sign on paperwork #87040

Definitely not on each page. In addition to being annoying, that’s overkill and dilutes the value of the acknowledgement.
Once at end of binder should be fine. But you can also have a signature line for a few isolated policies that you consider especially important and want to emphasize.
Personally, I think acknowledgements are a bit overrated, at least from a legal standpoint. A signature is rarely enough to persuade an inspector, judge or arbitrator that an employee actually read and understood a policy. Hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Volunteer Firefighter loosing hearing #87039

Although the situation is a bit unusual, the legal Q it raises is a common one. Let me break it down.
As you know, employers must accommodate disabled employees to the point of undue hardship. As a general rule, an accommodation constitutes undue hardship when it would put other workers (or third parties like visitors or people near the site) in serious danger. So the first thing you’d need to determine is whether the firefighter’s hearing problems are posing such a danger. Without knowing all the facts, I’d say they are.
Result: You probably don’t have to let him keep doing the job unless the hearing problem is addressed, e.g., he gets a hearing aid. Having co-workers use hand signals may also work although that wouldn’t solve the traffic danger. Normally, you’d also have to explore reassigning the employee to a less safety-sensitive position but that’s probably not the case since this is a volunteer firefighter.
But there’s also a second part of complying with accommodations duties, namely, following the right accommodations procedures. That would include doing a medical assessment and attempting to find an accommodation that’s suitable to his capabilities and needs.
BTW, if your Q is literally, “has anybody else had to deal with this'”, let me know and we’ll set this up as a Survey. glennd@bongarde.com. One way or another, I hope this helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Garnishment of wages – Notice from Employer to Employee #87038

Let me run this one by Alan, our payroll poobah. Will get back to u as soon as I hear back.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for CEO severance pay #87037

The ESA doesn’t enter executive compensation. Explanation: The employment standards laws apply only to employees, not management including CEO/executive compensation.
I can do some research on severance pay practices but I need to know more about your industry, the size of your company, where you’re located and other details about the arrangement. If you want to contact me directly, use glennd@bongarde.com. Thanks and I hope that helps. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Personal/Sick Days #87036

Ran your Q by our payroll guru, Alan McEwen. Hope his response answers your Q. Feel free to loop back with me directly. Glenn Demby glennd@bongarde.com
******
I’m not sure what is meant by the phrase “hired on availability”. Sometimes there isn’t a direct translation of works between English or French, or a different phrase is used in French than English.
I suspect this person means hired on a casual basis, i.e. no fixed schedule and only works when an assignment has been offered and accepted.
Generally, employment standards provide that employees must be given 2 or 3 weeks vacation each year. This means 2 or 3 weeks away from work. It doesn’t mean 10 or 15 days of days off work, if the employee does not work each and every regular week day. For example, an employee normally works Monday and Tuesday of each week. This person takes 2 weeks vacation from Sunday, March 10, 2019 to Saturday, March 23, 2019. This is 2 weeks of vacation, even if the person has only taken 4 days off work.
However, sick days are days off work. If a part time employee only works 2 or 3 days a week, and on one of those is sick, he or she is entitled to be paid for that day, the same as for any other employee.
Please note the version of the QC employment standards, in English on the web site is not current. You have to look at the text of Bill 176 itself.
Alan

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Contract workers and vacation entitlement #87035

Received the following response from our payroll expert Alan McEwen. I hope it answers your Q. If not, you can loop back with me directly at glennd@bongarde.com
****
The real question here is whether consecutive but separate contracts are a single period of employment.
The answer to that is going to depend on the circumstances.
Certainly, a pattern of separate contracts, issued back to back, has the opportunity for being treated as a single period of employment.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Vacation Pay Calculation Upon Immediate Termination – Ontario #87034

Received the following response from our payroll expert and I hope it answers your Q. If not, you can loop back with me directly–glennd@bongarde.com :
To calculate the vacation pay owing, use whatever the percentage last applied to the employment that is being terminated. If the contract of employment calls for 6, 8 or 10%, you can’t revert to the statutory minimum of 4 or 6%.

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Does the Ask the Expert Work? #87033

Did I pass the test?

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Can an employer request that an employee provide a doctors note following three consecutive days of absence from the office in Ontario? #87032

You can ask after just ONE day if you want. Requiring employees to verify their need for being absent is a totally legitimate right of an employer. What can get you into trouble is WHAT you ask for. All you’re entitled to is verification that the employee had some kind of illness requiring him/her to miss work. You can’t ask for the details or diagnosis. It’s a different story if the employee is requesting accommodations but that doesn’t sound like the case here. Suggest you do a search of HRI for doctor’s notes. We’ve done some really good pieces on the subject. Hope that helps and sorry I WAS absent a week in responding, at least in a manner of speaking. Glenn

[vickyp]

in reply to: Answer for Question on “Training” in regards to harassment and violence Bill C-65 passage #87031

Yeah, great great Q.
You’re referring to new Section 125(1)(z.‍163) of the OHS Regs. that requires an employer to “ensure that the person designated by the employer to receive complaints relating to occurrences of harassment and violence has knowledge, training and experience in issues relating to harassment and violence and has knowledge of relevant legislation” (emphasis added)
That requirement echoes the definition of “qualified person,” i.e., one who with respect to a specified duty (in this case, receiving harassment complaints) is qualified to perform that duty safely and properly “because of his knowledge, training and experience.” But the new definition does NOT use “qualified person.” The reason: Just being able to receive violence and harassment complaints properly and safely is NOT enough.The new requirement is designed to ensure that the person who does receive those complaints has SPECIFIC training, knowledge and experience in harassment and knows about the OHS Regs. including the new Bill C-65 provisions.
In other words, employers can no longer just designate their all-purpose or smartest guy/gal to receive complaints. They need a person to have a specific background in violence and harassment. If there’s nobody on staff with those credentials, the employer will have to rely on an outside third party to perform the function.
This is a really important point and I don’t think we emphasized it enough in covering C-65. I’ll circle back and do that going forward. Thx for the Q and I hope the answer helps. Glenn

[Author]

Posts