The employee argued that the termination clause was void and he was entitled to reasonable notice

by Rhonda B. Levy and Barry Kuretzky of Littler

In Forbes v. Glenmore Printing Ltd., 2023 BCSC 25, the Supreme Court of British Columbia (BC) disagreed with the employee’s argument that the termination clause in his employment agreement was invalid because it required the notice to which he would be entitled only under the individual termination provisions in section 63 of the Employment Standards Act (BC ESA), and effectively waived the minimum notice to which he would be entitled under the group termination provisions in s. 64 of the BC ESA.

The court dismissed the employee’s action, finding that the termination clause was enforceable because s. 63, not s. 64, establishes the minimum statutory requirements needed to oust the common law entitlement to reasonable notice, and the termination clause allowed for the same notice provided for in s. 63.

Background

On December 16, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the employer placed the employee, a senior pressman in its printing department, on a layoff. The parties agreed that the layoff amounted to a constructive dismissal, and that the employee was entitled to a severance payment; the single issue before the court was the amount of severance to which he was entitled.

The termination clause in the employment agreement provided, in part:

Glenmore Printing may terminate this Agreement by giving the Employee,

(a) After the first...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMilgFodHRwczovL3d3dy5oY2FtYWcuY29tL2Nh...