The Ontario judge hearing the Scotiabank unpaid overtime class action certification application has reserved his decision, according to this Canadian Press article. (You can read the Statement of Claim here).
The Scotiabank case is the second of the "Big Three" unpaid overtime class action certification appplications to be brought by the same coalition of law firms. read more »
A lawyer in Ontario at Blaney McMurtry LLP has written a paper entitled "Class Action Lawsuits and Employment Law: What You Need to Know".
BC court rules that employer permitted to reduce post-retirement group benefits, dismissses class action
In Bennett v. British Columbia, 2009 BCSC 1358, the BC Supreme Court ruled that the employer - the provincial government - was permitted to reduce post-retirement group benefits, and thus dismissed a class action. There were approximately 27,000 people in the impacted class.
Law firm Heenan Blaikie has written a summary of the case: "Reduction in Retiree Benefits Sanctioned in British Columbia" (October 7, 2009).
The Globe and Mail is reporting that the proposed representative plaintiff will be appealing the Ontario Superior Court of Justice's decision last month refusing to certify an unpaid overtime class action lawsuit against CIBC. You can read the article ("CIBC employee appeals judge's class-action denial", February 19, 2010) here.
As I noted in my post two days ago, the Ontario Superior Court refused to certify an unpaid overtime class action lawsuit against CIBC by its employees. Fresco v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 2009 CanLII 31177 (ON S.C.).
The claim for unpaid overtime alleged that CIBC's Overtime Policy (the "Policy") contravened the Canada Labour Code ("CLC') in two key ways:
- it required that employees receive approval in advance from a manager in order to be compensated for overtime hours worked, unless there were extenuating circumstances and approval was obtained as soon as possible afterwards; and
- it provided paid time off at the rate of 1.5 in lieu of monetary compensation, at the option of the employee.
Canada Labour Code overtime provisions read more »
A day after the Ontario Superior Court refused to certify a class action overtime lawsuit against CIBC, the Financial Post has published an article stating that a similar class action lawsuit against Scotiabank is moving forward. The claim against Scotiabank, which is apparently for $350 million, is being handled by the same team of lawyers who are handling the CIBC action.
As reported in the Globe and Mail, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has refused to certify an unpaid overtime class action lawsuit brought by the employees of Canadian Imperial Bank Commerce (CIBC). The suit alleged that CIBC's overtime policy violated the overtime provisions in the Canada Labour Code.
According to the article, "...the Ontario Superior Court ruled that the facts surrounding overtime complaints at CIBC were too 'individualized' to qualify or be certified as a class action lawsuit."
The article further notes that similar overtime class action lawsuits have been filed by employees at Scotiabank and the Canadian National Railway Co., with the respective class action certification hearings pending. read more »
Already facing a possible class action overtime lawsuit filed on behalf of its tellers, The Globe and Mail is reporting that CIBC - this time CIBC World Markets Inc. - is now also facing a second possible overtime class action lawsuit.
This one has been filed on behalf of CIBC World Markets' investment bankers, analysts and investment advisers. It is valued at $360 million. Law firm Juroviesky & Ricci LLP in Toronto is acting or the plaintiff.
The October 30, 2008 Globe article ("CIBC gets cuffed with second overtime lawsuit") can be found here.
In Macaraeg v. E Care Contact Centers Ltd., 2008 BCCA 182, the BC Court of Appeal ruled that employees are not entitled to enforce Employment Standards Act rights in court. Rather, they must enforce these statutory rights through the employment standards complaint process.
The appeal court's decision overturned the decision of Madam Justice Wedge at the trial level (2006 BCSC 1851).