Category: Benefits
-
More Leaves of Absence in Response to COVID-19
Newfoundland introduced Bill 33, COVID-19 Pandemic Response Act, on March 26, 2020. Bill 33 includes amendments to the Labour Standards Act (LSA), adding a new communicable disease emergency leave . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
New Leaves of Absence in Response to COVID-19
A number of provinces have added new leaves of absence (or amended existing ones) in response to COVID-19 . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Federal Bill C-13 re COVID-19 Emergency Measures
Federal Bill C-13, An Act respecting certain measures in response to COVID-19, received Royal Assent on March 25, 2020. Bill C-13 includes economic relief for businesses and individuals, as well as amendments to the leave of absence provisions in the Canada Labour Code . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Vogel v. Red River College, 2019 MBQB 182 – Employer Owed no Duty of Care re Changing Beneficiary Designation Form
McLachlan had a life insurance policy through his employer, Red River College (the College). Upon McLachlan's death, the policy was paid to his two daughters. Vogel, McLachlan's common law spouse, commenced a claim against the College, arguing that they had been negligent in not changing the beneficiary designation from McLachlan's daughters to Vogel . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Bentley v. Air Canada and Air Canada Pilots Association, 2019 CHRT 37 – Termination of Pension Eligible Pilot’s LTD Benefits Not Discriminatory
Bentley, a pilot employed by Air Canada, was entitled to retire with an unreduced pension, as he was 60 years old and had 25 years of service. On reaching this milestone, Bentley realized that, per the collective agreement, he was no longer entitled to long-term disability (LTD) benefits. The collective agreement provides that a pilot's LTD benefits may be terminated when the pilot becomes eligible for an unreduced pension . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Markham Stouffville Hospital (Uxbridge Site) v. CUPE, Local 1999, 2019 ONSC 5373 – Grievance Requiring LTD Coverage for Employees Age 65+ Upheld
The union filed a grievance, arguing that Markham Stouffville Hospital (the Hospital) violated the collective agreement by failing to continue long term disability (LTD) benefit coverage for employees who work past age 65 . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Barker v. Molson Coors Breweries and another (No. 3), 2019 BCHRT 192 – Age Discrimination Exemption Applies to Bona Fide Plans
Barker, an employee of Molson, complained that he was denied certain health and welfare benefits and/or provided inferior benefits, because he was over 65 years of age. The benefits were governed by a letter of understanding (LOU), which provided that employees who worked past age 65 would receive “only the insured welfare benefits provided to employees on retirement as at his normal retirement date . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Norfolk General Hospital v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1, 2019 CanLII 81794 – Plan Membership Not Sufficient for Reducing Top Up in Lieu of Benefits
A retiree, who was receiving a pension from the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP), returned to work at the Norfolk General Hospital as a part-time employee. She did not re-enrol in HOOPP and the Hospital made no contributions on her behalf . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Sears Canada Inc., et al. (Re), 2019 ONSC 3614 – Former Sears Employees Entitled to Life Insurance Surplus
Sears and its employees paid premiums to Sun Life for life insurance coverage. Each year a surplus/deficit calculation was performed, and any surplus was transferred to a separate fund. When the coverage was terminated, there was a surplus of approximately $850,000. At issue was whether the surplus should form part of the Sears estate or be distributed to the employees that had contributed to the surplus . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product. -
Bemister v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FCA 190 – Changes to Retiree Benefits Cost Sharing Did not Breach Contract or Charter
The Public Service Health Care Plan, a health care plan established by statute, provides benefit coverage to federal public sector employees and retirees. For a number of years, premiums were shared between the government and the retirees according to a 75/25 split (with retirees paying the smaller portion). In 2014, the federal government announced that it would be moving to a 50/50 cost sharing model . . .
This content is only available to subscribers. Please login or go to www.optimizelegal.com to learn more about this product.