Scenario M Flashcards
Mireille has been looking for new employment and recently received 2 job offers, both of which have similar hours and pay. She is uncertain of which to accept. The first is a position at a local advertising firm. Mireille would be expected to work full-time hours, but she would have the flexibility to arrange her work schedule herself. The firm has communicated verbally what Mireille’s compensation package would be, including performance-based bonuses, but it does not provide its staff with written employment contracts. The second position is with a large marketing company that has offices across Canada. The firm’s employees are currently trying to unionize. Mireille has never been part of a union or subject to a collective agreement before, and she is concerned she might find herself in a hostile work environment if management pushes back against the formation of the union. Should Mireille be particularly concerned about accepting the second position if the employees are trying to unionize? Why? a) No. Employers are prohibited from pressuring or threatening employees to prevent them from forming or joining a union. b) Yes. The formation of a union is always a contentious process, and she will likely be forced to choose sides right away. c) Yes. Although there are laws governing the unionization process, they favour the employer.
The answer is a. No. Employers are prohibited from pressuring or threatening employees to prevent them from forming or joining a union. Functional Area: A2 Rationale(s): A is correct. There are laws in place to ensure that management does not unduly pressure employees who are considering joining a union. B is incorrect. While the process can be unpleasant, discord is far from assured. C is incorrect. The laws governing this process strive to be fair to both parties and to provide employees with a number of protections. Reference(s): Unit 4, Module 4: The Collective Agreement Section 70 of the Ontario Labour Relations Act and section 94 of the Canada Labour Code (the latter is relevant here as this corporation would be under federal jurisdiction).
Mireille has been looking for new employment and recently received 2 job offers, both of which have similar hours and pay. She is uncertain of which to accept. The first is a position at a local advertising firm. Mireille would be expected to work full-time hours, but she would have the flexibility to arrange her work schedule herself. The firm has communicated verbally what Mireille’s compensation package would be, including performance-based bonuses, but it does not provide its staff with written employment contracts. The second position is with a large marketing company that has offices across Canada. The firm’s employees are currently trying to unionize. Mireille has never been part of a union or subject to a collective agreement before, and she is concerned she might find herself in a hostile work environment if management pushes back against the formation of the union. Mireille is interested in the position with the local advertising firm but is worried about not having a written employment contract. What should Mireille be most concerned about if she accepts the position and does not have a written employment contract? a) Mireille may not be entitled to termination pay if the employer later lays her off. b) The employer could eliminate Mireille’s entitlement to a performance-based bonus at any time without her agreement. c) Mireille could have difficulty claiming constructive dismissal if the employer later changes her work duties in response to changing operational needs.
The answer is c. Mireille could have difficulty claiming constructive dismissal if the employer later changes her work duties in response to changing operational needs. Functional Area: A2 Rationale(s): A is incorrect. Even without a written employment contract, Mireille would be entitled to the termination notice or pay in lieu of notice specified in the Employment Standards Act, 2000. B is incorrect. The employer could not reduce Mireille’s compensation package without her agreement. C is correct. Although changing the type of work that the employee performs can constitute constructive dismissal, claiming this as an employee can be difficult when there is not a written employment contract, especially in a flexible workplace environment. Reference(s): Employment Standards Act, 2000, s. 60(1)(c) Stevens v. Sifton Properties Limited, 2012 ONSC 5508 Brito v. Canac Kitchens, 2011 ONSC 1011; 2012 ONCA 61 Alcatel Canada Inc. v. Mary Egan, 225 OAC 398
Mireille has been looking for new employment and recently received 2 job offers, both of which have similar hours and pay. She is uncertain of which to accept. The first is a position at a local advertising firm. Mireille would be expected to work full-time hours, but she would have the flexibility to arrange her work schedule herself. The firm has communicated verbally what Mireille’s compensation package would be, including performance-based bonuses, but it does not provide its staff with written employment contracts. The second position is with a large marketing company that has offices across Canada. The firm’s employees are currently trying to unionize. Mireille has never been part of a union or subject to a collective agreement before, and she is concerned she might find herself in a hostile work environment if management pushes back against the formation of the union. Mireille accepts one of the positions. During her 80-day probation period, she does not receive benefits. Mireille asks her HR manager if the company can withhold benefits during her probation period. What should the HR manager advise her? a) Common Law imposes a probationary period of 3 months before employees are entitled to receive benefits. b) It is both legal and common for employers to impose a probationary period of 3 months less a day before employees are entitled to benefits. c) Employers can establish any entitlement period at their discretion, with no limitations.
The answer is b. It is both legal and common for employers to impose a probationary period of 3 months less a day before employees are entitled to benefits. Functional Area: B3 Rationale(s): A is incorrect. Common law does not impose a probationary period of 3 months. B is correct. Most employers do impose a 3-month less a day probationary period. C is incorrect. The employer can only make non-discriminatory changes to the entitlement period for employment benefits in the workplace. Reference(s): Both section 230 of the Canada Labour Code and section 54 of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 state that notice periods begin when an employee has been employed continuously for 3 months or longer, they are entitled to notice (as opposed to 3 months or less, which is how it is framed in section 55 of the Alberta Employment Standards Code). Employment Standards Act, 2000 sections 57 and 58 state benefits must continue over the course of the termination period.
