Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
Law of Work Archive

Why "Blue Jays Fever" is Probably a Bad Idea

by David Doorey October 8, 2015
written by David Doorey October 8, 2015

Don’t do it.
I know what you’re thinking.  Your boss won’t mind if you take one of those sick days to go to the pub with your buddies and watch today’s Blue Jays playoff game.  Blue Jay Fever is going around.
The Toronto Star sent me four questions about the outbreak of Blue Jays Fever that has hit Toronto workplaces.  Two of the

A Different Sort of Avian Bird Flu is Sweeping Toronto

A Different Sort of Avian Bird Flu is Sweeping Toronto


questions weren’t really law questions.  They were HRM questions about whether it’s a good idea for employers to let employees watch the game at work.  Many employers no doubt will allow that because it can be good for morale and team-building.  But if your employer doesn’t do that, and does not grant days off to watch the game, then what?
Here’s the answers I gave the Star.
Let’s expand on those answers for employment law students.
Can employees get away with calling in sick with Blue Jay flu?
Here’s what I said:

A different sort of bird flu is going around, but don’t expect your boss to be sympathetic. Unless you have bargained yourself a contractual right to take a day off or your employer is giving you permission, you have no legal right to take the day off. Any employee who lies about being sick to sneak off to the sports bar is putting their job at risk. 

Some employment contracts permit employees a certain number of days off work per year for personal reasons.  Some grant “sick days” but the employer doesn’t actually require the person to prove illness.  In some cases, employees will have vacation days they can use. Obviously if the contract allows an employee to take a day off to watch a baseball game, then the employee can take the day.
But for most people, their contract won’t include a free baseball day.  For those workers, calling in “sick” when you are not actually sick will violate their contract.  A nonunion employee who calls in sick with Blue Jays Fever will have violated at least two terms of the contract:  the implied term requiring honesty (see McKinley v. BC Tel)  and the implied term requiring the employee to avoid absenteeism.
In a unionized workplace, deliberate dishonesty and absenteeism will be grounds for discipline.
What are the repercussions if you’re caught?
Here’s what I said:

Dishonesty and unauthorized absenteeism are both violations of an employment contract that an employer could respond to by discipline or even termination. Non-union employees have less protection because their employers can always fire them for absenteeism, unless the absence is due to a disability or religion. Baseball may be a religion to some people, but the law doesn’t see things that way.
A unionized employer would usually have to show that absenteeism due to Blue Jay fever amounts to “just cause” for discipline. Taking a day off without permission almost certainly would be cause for discipline, but whether the absenteeism is grounds for termination would depend on the employee’s past record.
If a group of unionized employees scheme to all call in sick and watch the game together, that would also be an illegal strike that could result in discipline, termination, and even an order to pay the employer damages for lost productivity. It’s a risky adventure to try and fool your employer in order to watch a baseball game.

The key in relation to nonunion employees is that they can always be terminated for any at all, as long as the reason isn’t a violation of a statute.  So for example an employer who terminated a worker for absenteeism related to a disability or religion could be found to have violated human rights legislation. But Blue Jay Fever is not a disability, so the human rights statute won’t apply.

The only legal protection a nonunion employee has is potential entitlement to notice of the termination of the contract.  Calling in sick for Blue Jay Fever could lead to a nonunion employee’s termination.  Only question is whether the misconduct is serious enough that a court would find that employer had cause for dismissal, in which case the requirement for the employer to give notice is waived.
The unionized worker is in a different situation, because the collective agreement will probably require the employer to have “just cause” to discipline or terminate an employee for absenteeism due to Blue Jay Fever. Calling in sick under false pretences will be cause for some discipline, but how much discipline depends on the circumstances and the employee’s past disciplinary record.
Note the last point I make:  that an agreement between two or more unionized employees of a single employer to skip work to watch the Blue Jays game would be an illegal strike.  That’s because, in Ontario, we define “strike” very broadly.   Read the definition (Section 1 of the Labour Relations Act):

“strike” includes a cessation of work, a refusal to work or to continue to work by employees in combination or in concert or in accordance with a common understanding

Can you see how a decision by some coworkers to skip work and watch Blue Jays is caught by that definition? Employees who engage in an unlawful strike can be ordered to pay the employer damages for any lost production caused by the strike.
Reference to my Law of Work Book:
Chapter 9 describes implied terms, including those requiring attendance and the duty to be honest.Law of Work
Chapter 14 described discipline and termination of nonunion employees for cause (without notice).
Part IV of the book will explore the rules in unionized workplaces and will be released in 2016.

2 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is the Director of the School of HRM at York and Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and on the Advisory Board of the Osgoode Certificate program in Labour Law. He is a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program and a member of the International Advisory Committee on Harvard University’s Clean Slate Project, which is re-imaging labor law for the 21st century

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

previous post
Does a Non-Competition Clause Survive a Wrongful Dismissal?
next post
Are “Volunteers” the New Unpaid Interns?: How Ontario’s Employment Standards Act Treats "Volunteer" Misclassification

You may also like

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

October 3, 2018

A Successful Strike Vote is All That Stands...

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

Putin Invites Trump to Moscow for Second Meeting...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 218 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

CLWFFollow

CLWF
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
RSandillRicha Sandill@RSandill·
14h

@SCLSclinic and I were so fortunate to represent this client last year. I am thrilled that this decision brings more clarity for family status accommodations rights amidst a pandemic that has tested parents, caregivers, and families like never before. https://twitter.com/CanLawWorkForum/status/1364605259071561730

CLWF@CanLawWorkForum

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364627677785821185Retweet on Twitter 13646276777858211851Like on Twitter 13646276777858211853Twitter 1364627677785821185
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey@TheLawofWork·
14h

Here's my latest in @jacobinmag.

If Ontario's labor laws applied in Alabama, the Amazon vote would have been held months ago so workers could get back to their jobs. Instead, the NLRA permits Amazon to conduct a months' long onslaught of anti-union propaganda. https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1364613560425275392

Jacobin@jacobinmag

Amazon workers in Alabama are voting on whether to unionize, but the company is bombarding them with anti-union propaganda. In Canada, by contrast, votes are held quickly, making it harder for companies to stack the deck — a model that can work in the US. http://jacobinmag.com/2021/02/amazon-alabama-canada-labor-law-union-vote

Reply on Twitter 1364623976174092316Retweet on Twitter 13646239761740923168Like on Twitter 136462397617409231613Twitter 1364623976174092316
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
16h

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364605259071561730Retweet on Twitter 13646052590715617304Like on Twitter 13646052590715617304Twitter 1364605259071561730
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • 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
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • 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.