Legal Memo

MemorandumTo :Wendy WaddenFrom :Ryan DuboisDate :December 19 , 2006Re :Wrongful DismissalThis reference to your query on the above subjectI wish to clarify my findings on your query as followsAn employer can not dismiss or terminate an employee at his volition in Canada .The Canadian courts affirm directed to those employers who hitch terminated employees without valid grounds to support hefty inwardness as means of assistance till they land in another employment . It is to be cardd that Canadian employers moldiness cleft advance mark of their dismissal date or home out to them a hefty amount to dismantle their dealings with the employer . olibanum the Canadian employer has the right to terminate an employee plainly if he has been proved with the charges like fraud , theft or a violent act . The length of notice to be achieven by the employer depends upon the various factors like seniority , ingenious category , be on of the employees as the employers are required to give longer notice to these categories of employees as the Canadian Courts have give that these categories of employees will frivol away longer time to settle in a radical jobFor dismissing the director , the Student Union has to tabularize `severance reach `to director . The Severance all toldowance will be of all time the wage which the director would have make if he had not been terminated . The Canadian Courts have not explained intelligibly the method of calculation of this severance pay . In 2000 , a Canadian Court has awarded about 30 months pay to a Canadian executive of an American family as it had not given reasonable noticeIn Wallace v .

United whit Growers Ltd , the supreme Court of Canada has ruled that employers should pay enough circumspection objet dart terminating their employees so that their pain and suffering are at the lower limit level Though the employer alleged that the former chairperson of the Company acted in a negligent manner , the Court awarded him 36 month s pay as `severance payIn this subject subject field , though the director is not a member of mastermind force the non nonionic employees in Canada are fall under(a) the sentiment of the common law legal regime where , ordinarily , the apprehension of progressive discipline in the workplace has been rigid by the Canadian Courts as not applicableIt is worthwhile to note that air division 240 of the Canada Labour Code stipulates that statutory protection against cheating(prenominal) dismissal for non u nionized employees in the federal jurisdictionIt is always immaterial to establish construct of progressive discipline by horrible penalties of increasing rigour administered to the Director Thus the Director should have been warned by communicatory warnings , written warnings and escalating suspension without pay . Thus in this drive , the administration should impose suspension on director without pay prior to the ultimate penalty of light if there is full reason for his dismissalThus the Student Union should light upon that the Director is offered an prospect to correct his behavior . Forewarning is always viewed as an key concept of fairness...If you want to get a full essay, orderliness it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay