Manager argues employment contract violates standards after receiving minimal severance
Ontario's Superior Court of Justice recently dealt with an employment law dispute involving the enforceability of termination clauses and reasonable notice entitlements for a dismissed senior manager.
The worker challenged his employer's termination provisions, arguing that overly broad "for cause" definitions and restrictive "without cause" clauses violated employment standards legislation. He sought five months of common law reasonable notice instead of the single week of statutory minimum pay he received after nearly nine months of employment.
The case raised critical questions about whether problematic termination clauses can void entire employment agreements, how courts assess reasonable notice periods for short-term employees in senior roles, and whether workers remain entitled to unvested stock benefits during hypothetical notice periods.
The worker, a 45-year-old senior product manager, started employment in January 2023 with an annual salary of $221,564 and was terminated in October 2023.
His compensation included benefits valued at $10,831.86 per year, Registered Retirement Savings Plan contributions of $8,861.84 annually, and potential restricted stock units worth $73,017 USD scheduled to vest on 1 February 2024. The employer paid only one week of basic salary and benefits upon termination.
Despite his senior title, the...
The offshore world has always attracted strong opinions. It’s complex, global, and full of moving parts that most people don’t fully understand. Mix that with online anonymity and you suddenly hav...