Dealing With Termination Issues On the Cheap Can Get Pricey

Brian Bell

Toronto Employment Lawyer Brian Bell - Pace Law Firm: There have been a significant number of Termination Packages pass across my desk recently with one overwhelming similarity: the Employer tends to offer the Employment Standards Act Notice amount - and, if applicable, the severance amounts - plus a couple of weeks above these statutory amounts.

The Employer, for this additional time period above the minimum, requests a “Full and Final Release” on return.

It would seem that no matter how long the Employee has been with the company, this same approach would apply. In a recent edition of the Lawyers Weekly, Daniel Lublin at Whitten and Lublin recounts the case of Hussain v. Sinclair Canada Inc. Daniel Lublin represented Mr. Hussain.

Mr. Hussain was a 36 year employee who received only the equivalent of 9 months for a Termination Without Cause. At the time of the Termination, he was 65 years old. He had not retired. The Court, in its decision/award, exceeded the prior maximum of 24 months for a long-termed employee like Mr. Hussain. Thus, the Employer’s maximum exposure of 24 months Termination had been increased to 26 months, reflecting the Court's sympathy with long-termed employees who are offered a Termination Package that is viewed as clearly inadequate.

There are other reasons Employers should consider. Employers who feel they want to deal with the Termination issue “on the cheap” can be exposed to even more expense.

While this issue may be viewed to be applicable only to those employees with a long history with their company, it may be useful for employers to remember that offering slightly above the legislation's minimum may be a very costly strategy.