Water Cooler Justice

In this episode, Chris and Sarah, alongside Mitchell Rose, Stuart Rudner, and Sean Bawden, discuss the case of Wilshire v. Olympic Wholesale, focusing on the complexities of employment law, particularly around just cause and the importance of proper investigations. The panel explores the implications of the case outcome and the lessons learned regarding employer responsibilities and employee rights. The conversation delves into the complexities of employment law, particularly focusing on the definitions of 'cause' and 'willful misconduct' in termination cases. The panel discusses the implications of recent court decisions, including the Wilshire case, and the ongoing debate surrounding the Wallace bump in damages.TakeawaysImportance of thorough investigationsUnderstanding just cause in employment law Complexity of Employment LawImpact of Court DecisionsChapters00:00 Introduction to Water Cooler Justice03:00 Case Overview: Wilshire v. Olympic Wholesale05:54 Investigation Process and Challenges09:00 The Role of Management in Employment Disputes12:09 Understanding Just Cause and Its Implications14:53 Mediation and Resolution Strategies17:45 Evidentiary Threshold for Cause Termination21:06 Outcome of the Case and Its Significance27:35 Understanding Cause in Employment Law30:43 The Role of Willful Misconduct33:03 Analyzing the Wilshire Case Outcome39:54 The Wallace Bump Controversy43:09 Implications of Judicial Decisions52:25 Exploring Moral Damages vs. Notice Periods

Is the landscape of employment law shifting? Two recently released Court of Appeal decisions — Baker v Van Dolder's Home Team Inc. and Li v Wayfair Canada ULC — are getting a lot of promotion, but do these appeals stand for the proposition that employment law has changed? Our panelists explore what these decisions really say about contractual interpretation and consider the practical implications for employers and employees alike. Ride along as some of Toronto's top lawyers dig into the mechanics of the legal arguments.

The episode features a discussion on the case of Adelman versus IBM Canada, focusing on the entitlement to bonuses, RSUs, and damages post-termination. The panelists discuss the uncertainty and challenges in employment litigation, the interpretation of saving provisions, and the distinction between stock options and RSUs. They also explore the implications of RSUs as wages from employment and the need for clarity in severance provisions to attract business to Canada.

“Employment income earned during the notice period is generally to be treated as mitigation of loss”.Join employment law leaders Nina Gupta, Ellen Lowe and Chris Robertson as they delve into the pivotal Williamson v. Brandt Tractor case, reshaping our understanding of mitigation and wrongful termination payments. Discover why the evidentiary threshold for just cause is challenging, how recent case law impacts mitigation earnings, and the strategic importance of managing notice periods. This episode offers essential insights for employment lawyers, HR professionals, and business owners navigating the evolving legal landscape. Don't miss this insightful breakdown.

Barry Fisher and Matthew Dewar join Chris Robertson and Sarah Goodenough to discuss Kirchmair v EXP Global Inc. This episode dives into a high stakes, alleged constructive dismissal and offers a nuanced analysis on issues surrounding contractual termination provisions, various bonus structures, damages tied to incentive compensation, and when employer conduct crosses the threshold into moral and punitive liability.Is there a case you would like to hear us talk about? Do you have a story of workplace drama you would like to share with our panel? Reach out to us at [email protected].