• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Blog

Logo 1 Created with Sketch.

  • About
  • Our Lawyers
    • Andrew Wray
    • Juan Echavarria
    • Salman Rana
  • Expertise
    • Employment Law
    • Civil Litigation
    • COVID-19 Resources
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Book a Consultation
Employment-Lawyer-wray-legal-

Termination during COVID can result in longer notice periods

December 7, 2021 Tags: Covid Employment Law, Employment Law, termination notice

In the early days of the COVID, it was suggested that, when evaluating wrongful and constructive dismissal claims in the context of the pandemic, the Courts would take into account the negative effects of COVID on the job market, when assessing whether employees have met their duty to mitigate. Similarly, it was suggested that the heightened difficulty in obtaining a job could result in the Courts awarding longer notice periods to employees terminated during the pandemic. See our previous article on this topic here.

While the development of case law regarding employment terminations during COVID is ongoing, the Superior Court of Ontario has recently provided further clarity on the subject. In Pavlov v. The New Zealand and Australian Lamb Company Limited (Pavlov) the Court held that the economic uncertainties caused by COVID should contribute to lengthening notice periods as they have a significant impact in the employee’s mitigation efforts and ability to find alternate employment.

When determining the correct notice period, Courts will generally take into consideration variety of factors, known as the Bardal Factors. The Bardal Factors are a non-exhaustive list of considerations that the Courts will take into account when assessing the appropriate notice period. These factors include, among others, the age of the employee, character of employment, length of service, and availability of similar employment. In Pavlov¸ the Court highlights, in reference to the COVID pandemic, that the availability of similar employment is a factor which may be affected by other economic factors beyond the control of the parties.

In Pavlov, the Court took into consideration that the economic effects of the pandemic were likely to be obstacles for the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain alternate employment. Furthermore, the Court highlighted that these obstacles would, or should, have been known to the employer at the time of dismissal. The latter consideration is of key importance as the Courts in Ontario have previously held, with respect to reasonable notice, that only the circumstances existing at the time of termination must be taken into account. This means that where an employee was terminated before the effects of the pandemic on the job market were known, employees would not be entitled to longer notice periods as such risks were unknown to the employer at the time. See our blog regarding pre-COVID terminations.

Given that the employee in Pavlov was terminated at a time where the employer would, or should, know of the negative economic effects cause by the pandemic, the Court awarded a longer notice period.

It must be noted that while the increase difficulty in finding alternate employment during COVID can result in longer notice periods, the availability of similar employment is only one of the factors taken into account by the Court. The plaintiff in Pavlov was awarded 10 months reasonable notice of termination or pay in lieu thereof. However, the Court does not specify how much the notice period was lengthened due to the difficulty in finding similar employment.

Generally, the Court will consider all of the Bardal Factors, as well as any other relevant factors, to determine reasonable notice. The assessment of notice will take into account the full context of the employment relationship.

In Pavlov, for example, in determining that the notice period should be 10 months, the Court took into account current economic conditions, but also the fact that the plaintiff’s position carried significant responsibility, authority, opportunity for growth and a high level of remuneration as well as the plaintiff’s age and experience. Considering all these factors, the Court determined that finding a similar position would be expected to take longer, particularly so during COVID, and awarded 10 months notice despite the plaintiff’s short service, being only 3 years of employment.

While the Court in Pavlov did not specify how much time was added to the plaintiff’s notice period to compensate for the increased difficulty in finding employment, the Provincial Court in British Columbia did so in its recent judgement in Snider v. Reotech Construction Ltd (Snider). In Snider, the Court determined, regarding the plaintiff, that as an employee with 2.4 years of service as a construction worker, the case law fixed the plaintiff’s notice period at 4 months. In addition, the Judge in Snider stated that:

“…I would add an additional two weeks based on the challenges posed by COVID-19 and the availability of similar employment, as contemplated by the Bardal factors.  The defendant terminated the claimant during a serious global pandemic.  He has retrained but still has not found another job.  In the circumstances, I find that four and a half months is the appropriate notice given the claimant’s inability to find alternate and available employment.”

While the Court in Snider determined that an additional 2 weeks of notice was sufficient to compensate for the effects of the pandemic on the job market, it does not mean that the amount of time which may be added to the notice period in all cases will be fixed at 2 weeks. Instead, Courts are likely to take the holistic approach that was employed by the Court in both Snider and Pavlov, and determine the appropriate notice period taking into account all Bardal Factors in the context of COVID.

It is important to understand how each aspect of the employment relationship can affect your rights at the time of termination. We often advise our clients regarding their notice entitlements in light of all relevant factors. You may contact us at any time for assistance.

 

 

 

 

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Does My Original Contract Still Apply After 15 Years of Employment?
  • Mass Layoffs: Know the Law, Know your Rights
  • Severance pay in Ontario: What if I am fired for cause?
  • Should Companies update their Employment Contracts?
  • Non-competition Agreements Restricted under the Employment Standards Act

Tags

Blog Civil Litigation Constructive Dismissal Covid Employment Law Covid Mental Health Covid Wrongful Termination Employment Employment Contract Employment Law Health and Safety Human Rights Juan Echavarria Just Cause Termination Limitation Period Long-Term Disability Benefits LTD Benefits LTD Insurance Benefits Mechanical Business News Resignation Sale of Business Severance Pay Stock Options Termination Law termination notice Termination rights Total Disability wrongful dismissal

Footer

Contact Us

181 University Avenue, Suite 2200 Toronto, Ontario Canada M5H 3M7

T 416-642-0460
F 416-363-7875

Contact Page LinkedIn
Book a Consultation





    Please note that contact through our website is for informational purpose only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship.

    * Required

    [anr_nocaptcha g-recaptcha-response]

    Reviews

    Clecia Louzado
    Clecia Louzado
    2021-05-10
    Andrew is very professional, knowledgeable, fair and straightforward. I was grateful for his ability to outline all my options clearly and also his professionalism during a difficult time in his personal life. He did not let his personal life affect any time sensitive needs of my case, which didn’t go unnoticed. Highly recommend Andrew!
    Anton Koschany
    Anton Koschany
    2021-02-21
    Andrew Wray provided thorough analysis of my circumstances and provided sound advice. He is personable, knowledgeable and took the stress out of a stressful situation. In my professional career I have had occasion to work with many lawyers and I can easily say that Andrew meets and exceeds the bar (pardon the pun). Anton K.
    Lamrana Bah
    Lamrana Bah
    2021-02-02
    I had a very positive experience with the staff at Wray Legal LLP. Andrew Wray is a very brilliant bilingual lawyer. I was in search of a French Speaking lawyer and I came across him. He is a good listener, very professional with patience and passion for his job. I am grateful I met you. Thanks to you and your staff for your exceptional services 🙂
    Jamie Saunders
    Jamie Saunders
    2021-01-21
    Andrew Wray came highly recommended and now I know why! Andrew took a personal and very supportive approach as he helped to guide me through a long and challenging labour hearing process that had already cost me too many sleepless nights. His demonstrated understanding of the complex legal and procedural issues gave me tremendous confidence. Having never previously testified or given evidence, his advice on what I could expect on the stand was worth its weight in gold. I was kept completely in the loop with regard to strategies and next steps, and was always made to feel like I was steering the ship - with Andrew as my formidable engine. Oh, and by the way, we won the case! 🙂
    Mark Cuff
    Mark Cuff
    2020-12-19
    I am also highly recommending Wray Legal. Andrew represented me in a complicated employment matter - he was extremely responsive, and knowledgable in offering excellent legal advice. Andrew explained/outlined thoroughly what to expect and worked to make sure I was getting the very best outcome. I really liked how very realistic he was about my options and which would be the most beneficial to my specific situation. Wray Legal came highly recommended from friends and I can see why. Excellent experience
    Jennifer Morrison
    Jennifer Morrison
    2020-12-18
    Andrew and his team were there for me at a very difficult time. Andrew is always kind and compassionate, while understanding the job that needs to be done. I was very pleased with the outcome of my case. When it comes to a legal team, you want the best in your corner and Andrew is the best! I would highly recommend calling Andrew to see how his team can get the best settlement for you, I’m glad I did!
    Richard Goodman
    Richard Goodman
    2020-12-18
    Andrew helped me to resolve a complicated legal dispute with a former employer. Andrew was extremely professional is all of his dealings with me and opposing counsel. Andrew treated me as a partner, not just a client. It was an extremely positive experience and outcome, especially considering the difficult nature of the dispute. Thanks for all your help, Andrew!
    Tamara Roitman
    Tamara Roitman
    2020-12-11
    Andrew represented me through a workplace issue during a very low point in my life. From a legal standpoint he was extremely knowledgeable and professional. More than that, however, he was kind, gentle and understanding.  Having a lawyer that not only knew what he was doing, but who is also a good human being who went above and beyond to communicate and offer emotional support was the best possible thing both for the outcome of my case as well as for my mental health. I will always feel grateful to Andrew and his firm.
    © 2023 Wray Legal