Skip to content

Top five employment law issues going into 2021

Grant Machum, ICD.D and Mark Tector

2020 was a challenging year for many people and businesses. And while we are all happy to have 2020 in the rearview mirror, we anticipate that there will continue to be challenges going forward, including in employment law. Below are five legal questions we expect employers will have in 2021, along with our answers:

1. Once available, can I require employees to take the COVID-19 vaccine as a term of employment?

Yes, in certain circumstances, an employer can introduce a reasonable policy requiring vaccinations. The extent and terms of the policy will depend, in part, on the industry and should be crafted with input from legal counsel. Employers dealing with high risk populations (e.g. health care and nursing homes) and the public (e.g. retail) may have more extensive policies and requirements for their employees. Employers have statutory obligations to ensure the health and safety of their employees along with others who may be in the workplace. Any policy should:

  • have terms to address potential bona fide refusals (such as on the basis of legitimate health considerations);
  • consider the consequences for an employee who refuses the vaccine, including accommodation to the point of undue hardship of an employee who may refuse on grounds protected by human rights legislation;
  • remain flexible and allow for adjustment(s) as the pandemic and vaccination rollout evolves, including as the requirements and advice from Public Health may change; and
  • ensure reasonable measures and procedures are in place to address employee privacy requirements and considerations.

2. Can I terminate an employee for cause who disregards COVID-19 protocols and puts others at risk?

Yes. At law, each termination for cause must be considered on its own particular merits and circumstances. However, in a recent Ontario decision (a unionized workplace) an employee went to work during the mandatory self-isolation period after testing positive for COVID-19. The employer terminated the employee for cause as she had breached the safety requirements. The arbitrator hearing the matter upheld the termination.

3. Can I keep employees on lay-off?

With the second (or third) wave hitting much of the Canadian population, some businesses have continued to see drastic reductions in business or have had to again reduce their businesses after having opened up during the summer and fall. Some provinces have extended the ability under applicable legislation to continue lay-offs (e.g. Ontario converted statutory lay-offs into leaves and has now extended this until July 3, 2021). Nova Scotia also has a statutory exemption in relation to notice of termination (or pay in lieu of such notice) where the circumstances giving rise to the termination or lay-off are, in part, “beyond the control” of the employer. The pandemic is certainly beyond everyone’s control, unfortunately. Employers will generally also have to consider employment contracts to determine whether a lay-off or continued lay-off is permitted.

4. Given the impact on my business, can I modify the terms of employment for my employees?

The impact of COVID-19 on many businesses has been unprecedented. Accordingly, in these unprecedented times, employers generally have the ability to make changes to duties and terms, including the duties of those who may be returning from lay-off. The law recognizes that most employment relationships are not static and evolve. However, depending on the extent of the changes, some larger or more significant changes may require that an employer provide advance notice of the changes. An employers’ existing employment agreements or policies may also already have “baked in” terms that allow for changes, or require a stipulated amount of notice before changes can be implemented. Therefore employers should review any existing employment agreements and policies.

5. What should I do to be proactive and minimize employment-related issues going into 2021?

Update your employment agreements and policies, including occupational health and safety policies. By doing so, and being proactive, you may reduce employment-related issues and associated costs going forward. Understandably, COVID-19 was the main issue in 2020. However, in employment law there were some significant developments unrelated to the pandemic, including a number of key court decisions (see our earlier client updates, including in relation to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Matthews v. Ocean Nutrition concerning employee bonus/incentive plans). Many of our clients are taking the opportunity to review and update their employment agreements, including in relation to termination provisions, lay-off provisions, and bonus/incentive entitlements.


This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour & Employment group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

TTC’s Random Testing Decision: A Bright Light for Employers in the Haze of Marijuana Legalization

April 11, 2017

Rick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…

Read More

Unionization in the Construction Industry: Vacation Day + Snapshot Rule = Disenfranchisement

April 4, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Michelle Black On March 14, 2014, CanMar Contracting Limited (“CanMar”) granted a day off to two of its hard working and longer serving employees so they could spend time with their respective families. That…

Read More

Sometimes a bad deal is just a bad deal: unconscionability and insurance claim settlements in Downer v Pitcher, 2017 NLCA 13

March 16, 2017

Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that…

Read More

Privilege Prevails: Privacy Commissioner protects solicitor-client communications

March 16, 2017

Jonathan Coady After more than five years, the Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “Privacy Commissioner”) has completed her review into more than sixty records withheld by a local school board on the…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Nova Scotia Teachers Union & Government – a synopsis

March 7, 2017

Peter McLellan, QC & Richard Jordan Introduction On February 21, 2017 the Nova Scotia Government passed Bill 75 – the Teachers’ Professional Agreement and Classroom Improvement (2017) Act. This Bulletin will provide some background to what is, today,…

Read More

Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong: The Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador weighs in on the former client rule in commercial transactions

March 1, 2017

Bruce Grant, QC and Justin Hewitt In the recent decision of Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong1 the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador confirmed that where a law firm acts jointly for the borrower and lender in the placement…

Read More

The Ordinary Meaning of Insurance: Client Update on the SCC’s Decision in Sabean

February 21, 2017

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top