18 month award for 65 year old Container Lift Operator

In Systad v. Raymont Logistics Inc, a 65 year old Container Lift Operator, with no supervisory duties was awarded 18 months notice after 18 years service, in spite of the employer’s argument that 8 weeks’ notice was enough given his (allegedly) non-responsible job duties. The full text of the reasons for judgement are available here. … Continued

Continue Reading

Systad v. Ray-Mont Logistics (18 month award for 65 year old Container Lift Operator)

A 65 year old Container Lift Operator, with no supervisory duties was awarded 18 months notice after 18 years service, in spite of the employer’s argument that 8 weeks’ notice was enough given his (allegedly) non-responsible job duties.

Continue Reading

Whiting v. Boys and Girls Club Services of Greater Victoria

Aside from being a fairly straightforward case based on principles relevant to reasonable notice and mitigation, the case contains a useful analysis of the effect of termination clauses in a series of fixed term employment agreements, the requirement of consideration for an employer’s requirement that an employee agree to clauses during employment, and the basic principle that termination for lack of funding is no different for reasonable notice purposes than any other wrongful dismissal.

Continue Reading

Timetable Set for steps to Certification Hearing

Class counsel Murray Tevlin and Dan Gleadle, together with counsel for the BCMA, appeared before Justice McEwen in the BCSC on two recent occasions, and with the Court’s assistance we have worked out the following schedule: Plaintiff affidavit materials filed: July 15 Defendant affidavit filed: Sept 13 Plaintiff Argument/reply materials delivered: Oct 11 Defendant argument … Continued

Continue Reading

Court Reserves Judgement on Distribution Issue

On July 6th and 7th, 2011, Dan Gleadle, counsel for the representative claimants, and Jennifer Francis, counsel for Freightliner Ltd. appeared before the Honourable Madam Justice Ballance, the Case Management Judge, and made submissions regarding the scope of the distribution group.  This hearing was required because 8 individuals who were not residents of BC at … Continued

Continue Reading