The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • In the Media
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • In the Media
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Mass Dismissal of 'Non-Employees' at Bruce Nuclear

by David Doorey September 10, 2009
written by David Doorey September 10, 2009

There’s a peculiar news story in today’s Toronto Star describing how ‘dozens’ of ‘contract workers’ had been dismissed by Bruce Power Corp for misuse of the internet. The story gives virtually no details about what happened, other than that the workers are alleged to have violated Bruce’s “Code of Conduct”.
If you are one of the workers affected, please feel free to leave a comment detailing what happened.
The observation I wanted to make was about another point raised by the story.  Bruce Power claims that none of the workers are their own employees.  Presumably that means that it is Bruce’s position that the workers are self-employed or employees of some other company, but who are provided with the use of computers by Bruce and subject to a code of conduct related to the computer use.  The story itself describes the workers as ’employees’, but that doesn’t mean anything, since reporters often miss the legal niceties.
Curiously, though, one person who was dismissed described himself as a ’20 year employee’.  Does that mean he has worked for Bruce for 20 years as a contractor?
Who knows.  Some companies like to call their workers ‘independent contractors’ so they can avoid the costs and responsibilities associated with having employees.   But just because an employer calls someone a contractor, it doesn’t make it so.  There are legal tests for determining if someone is an employee or not, as I noted in another recent post.   So, for example, if the workers at Bruce believe that really are ’employees’ and not self-employed, they could sue Bruce for wrongful dismissal, or file a claim for notice and maybe severance pay under the Employment Standards Act.  The adjudicator would then need to decide the issue of employment status and then whether the employer had ’cause’ to dismiss the workers without notice.  If they are not employees, then they are not entitled to any rights reserved in law only for employees.
A nice discussion of this appears in Belton v. Liberty Insurance, for example.
We’ll have to see if more information comes out about the status of these Bruce workers.

0 comment
1
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is a Full Professor of Work Law and Labour 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
Seale on "Boobie Girls" and Human Rights
next post
Top 10 Labour & Employment Law Articles (Sept. 12)

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

Substack
Bluesky

BlueSky Latest Posts

No posts available.

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
  • Constructive Dismissal
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gender
  • 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
  • New Zealand
  • 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
  • Tax Law
  • 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.