The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Can a non-union Employer suspend an employee without pay?

by David Doorey August 13, 2008
written by David Doorey August 13, 2008

Originally posted August 13, 2008
I teach a graduate course on labour law to human resource professionals.  When I mention to them that a suspension without pay in a non-union workplace is likely to amount to a constructive dismissal (unless the contract expressly gives the employer the right to do that), the students are often quite surprised.  My point when I raise this is to contrast the non-union setting with the union setting in which suspensions without pay are not only common, but often expected by arbitrators as part of a program of progressive discipline.
contractThe surprise of my students caused me to go back and look at this issue again.  There’s a recent Ontario case decided by Justice Echlin, who by chance happens to be the author of a leading textbook on employment law (For Better or For Worse, with Christine Thomlinson).   He ought to know the law.  The case is Carscallen v. FRI Corp  The employee was suspended without pay indefinitely for a variety of alleged reasons, primarily due to a failure to ensure that certain materials made it to a trade conference in time.  His decision was  upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal.
Echlin J. begins his analysis with the following observation:

Historically, the common law has tended towards the view that in the absence of an express or implied term in the contract of employment, it is generally not open to an employer to suspend without pay as a means of disciplining an employee for misconduct. (para. 30)

Thus, assuming there is no expressed or implied term allowing for suspensions, the question is whether the historical approach has changed.   Echlin noted that in two recent decisions–the Supreme Court case, McKinley v. B.C. Tel.(esp. at paras. 52, 53)and the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in  Haldane v. Shelbar Enterprises Ltd (esp. at para. 16)–appellant courts had hinted at the possibility that a right to suspend without pay might make some sense.  But neither  of these decisions changed the law.
So, a non-union employer does not have a right to suspend without pay absent an expressed or implied term permitting this.  Absent that term, the suspension can be treated as a fundamental breach of the contract by the employee, amounting to a constructive dismissal and therefore a right to reasonable notice damages.  This is what happens in Carscallen.  Echlin found that the suspension amounted to a constructive dismissal and ordered 9 month’s notice.
On the question of whether a right to suspend without pay should be implied, Echlin noted correctly that this should only be done by courts in clear and exceptional cases.  An implied right to suspend without pay is not necessary to give business efficacy to the employment contract, so that the term can only be implied if it is clear and obvious that the parties intended this result.  Rarely will this be the case.
Lastly, the Court acknowledged that, if the ER had cause to summarily dismiss the employee without notice, but instead opts a lesser penalty of suspension, the court would not allow a constructive dismissal complaint.  That makes sense, since in that case, the ER is cutting the EE a break, and giving him/her a second chance.  In Carscallen, the Court found that the employer did not have cause to dismiss the employee without reasonable notice.
Of course, all an employer needs to do is include the right to suspend without pay in the employment contract. Courts would presumably enforce this right, although they might review whether the employer’s exercise of that right was proper.
Issue for Discussion
In unionized environments, employers almost always bargain a right to suspend as a form of discipline, but nonunion employers rarely include such a right in their individual employment contracts with employees.  Why do you think that is?
Do you think the courts should recognize an implied right to suspend employees without pay as a form of discipline?  What arguments can you make to justify the implication of such a term?

0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Guest Blog: Gorsky on Anticipatory Breach of Contract at Ford (Oakville)
next post
Neutrality Agreements in Canada

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to Follow

Law Prof. Talking #labor & #employment #law to the masses. @YorkUniversity @OsgoodeNews @LSELaw @CLJEHarvard @Jacobin @OnLaborBlog https://t.co/5V9r8VPHsh

TheLawofWork
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
14m

President Biden calls for passage of #PROAct

Act bans employer captive audience anti-union meetings;

Expands def of “employee” to capture essentially what we call “dependent contractors” in Canada;

Increase penalties for unfair labor practices;

Doesn’t adopt card-check.

Steven Greenhouse @greenhousenyt

President Biden: "I'm so sick and tired of companies breaking the law when workers are seeking to unionize"

Reply on Twitter 1623164729530191874 Retweet on Twitter 1623164729530191874 Like on Twitter 1623164729530191874 4 Twitter 1623164729530191874
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
4h

My fingers are just too big to play an A chord on the #guitar.

Otherwise I would be a rock star. This is the only thing holding me back.

Reply on Twitter 1623109078431027200 Retweet on Twitter 1623109078431027200 Like on Twitter 1623109078431027200 12 Twitter 1623109078431027200
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
4h

Not seen comparable stats for Canada.There are terminations, but also better laws in most Canadian jurisdictions, including

- remedial certification
- interim reinstatement
- card-check/quick votes

“1 in 5 workers in US is fired for organizing a union” https://onlabor.org/labor-law-reform-is-needed-for-unions-to-succeed/

Reply on Twitter 1623103873161330688 Retweet on Twitter 1623103873161330688 Like on Twitter 1623103873161330688 1 Twitter 1623103873161330688
Load More

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Newfoundland
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.