Temporary lay off timeline extended to 26 weeks from 13… temporarily
Twila Reid and John Samms
On Friday, June 12, 2020, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador announced it has extended the time period under section 50 of the Labour Standards Act (“the Act”) that converts a temporary layoff into a permanent termination.
The Order doubles the amount of time a person may be considered to have been temporarily laid off to 26 weeks from 13 weeks, so long as that timeframe is captured within a period of 33 consecutive weeks between March 18 and September 18, 2020. If a worker receives pay during the 33 week period, the number of days for which the employee is paid does not count toward the 26 week lay-off period. The deadline to make a complaint is extended to 12 months from the date the employee’s contract is terminated (the previous deadline was 6 months).
This is a temporary change as the Act itself has not been amended. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council made the Order through the Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Order, made under the power of section 6 of the Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Act, a creature of the provincial government’s COVID-19 response that impacts a myriad of statutory deadlines.
This move may temporarily ease some of the pressure on employers as the normal operation of the Act would have employers facing decisions to permanently terminate employees even though many businesses cannot operate as a result of ongoing COVID-19 restrictions. This change allows employers to take more time to consider how best to bring employees back to work or adjust their business in accordance with the so-called “new normal”.
Employers should seek specific legal advice to understand how the above Order is applicable to their particular circumstances, including what further notice(s) if any they should provide to laid off employees.
The Order, as published in the Gazette, states as follows:
The Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Order is amended by adding immediately after section 4 the following:
4.1(1) Notwithstanding section 50 of the Labour Standards Act, where an employer temporarily lays off an employee on or after March 18, 2020 and before September 18, 2020 and the lay-off exceeds 26 weeks in a period of 33 consecutive weeks, the employee shall, for the purposes of Part X of that Act be considered to have been terminated at the beginning of the 26 week period.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a day during the period of 33 consecutive weeks for which an employee receives pay, including pay the employee receives for a public holiday occurring during that period, shall not be counted in the calculation of the 26 week lay-off period set out in subsection (1).
(3) Where the 6 month period referred to in subsection 62(3) of the Labour Standards Act falls on or after March 18, 2020 and before September 18, 2020, a person may, notwithstanding subsection 62(3) of that Act, file a complaint within 12 months of the date the employee’s contract is terminated.
This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership articles and updates.
Archive
On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…
Read MoreIn May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…
Read MoreBy Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…
Read MoreJoe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…
Read MoreThe Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…
Read MoreOn May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…
Read MoreBy Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…
Read MoreIn a case where there is a contributorily negligent plaintiff and two or more negligent defendants, can the plaintiff recover 100% of her damages from any of the defendants? The answer in Nova Scotia is…
Read MoreOn Friday, the Province of New Brunswick announced that it would not proceed at this time with the recently proposed changes to binding interest arbitration. The Province announced that a joint labour management committee will be struck to examine…
Read MoreOn March 29, 2016, the Province of New Brunswick tabled proposed changes to the Industrial Relations Act and the Public Services Labour Relations Act. If passed, these changes would dramatically alter well-established principles of private sector collective bargaining.…
Read More