MacLennan v. Thyssen Mining Construction of Canada Ltd., 2002 SKQB 178 (Sask. Q.B.).
The Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench has held that an hourly-wage construction employee was considered a permanent employee and was entitled to reasonable notice of termination based on the common law and was not limited to the minimum standards under provincial employment standards legislation. The court found the worker was entitled to regard himself as a permanent employee of the defendant due to his employment of significant duration without layoff.
MacLennan was a welder who had worked for the defendant continuously for a period of 14 years and eight months. Although he was paid hourly, he considered himself a permanent employee and believed his employment would continue indefinitely. He argued he was entitled to reasonable notice, or pay in lieu of notice, upon dismissal as determined by common-law requirements.
The employer took the position that, since the plaintiff was an hourly-wage employee in an industry that was cyclical in nature, it was only obligated to provide him with pay in lieu of notice based on the requirements of the Labour Standards Act (LSA).
Rejecting the employer’s argument, the court held that the plaintiff’s employment could not be viewed as cyclical given the fact he had worked almost 15 years without interruption, having only been laid off once prior to that.
The court further held that being an hourly worker did not prevent him from being entitled to reasonable notice in accordance with the common law, and he was not, by this fact, restricted only to the statutory notice period set out in the LSA.
He was awarded 10 months’ pay and benefits in lieu of notice as opposed to the eight weeks he would have been entitled to under the provisions of the LSA.
The Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench has held that an hourly-wage construction employee was considered a permanent employee and was entitled to reasonable notice of termination based on the common law and was not limited to the minimum standards under provincial employment standards legislation. The court found the worker was entitled to regard himself as a permanent employee of the defendant due to his employment of significant duration without layoff.
MacLennan was a welder who had worked for the defendant continuously for a period of 14 years and eight months. Although he was paid hourly, he considered himself a permanent employee and believed his employment would continue indefinitely. He argued he was entitled to reasonable notice, or pay in lieu of notice, upon dismissal as determined by common-law requirements.
The employer took the position that, since the plaintiff was an hourly-wage employee in an industry that was cyclical in nature, it was only obligated to provide him with pay in lieu of notice based on the requirements of the Labour Standards Act (LSA).
Rejecting the employer’s argument, the court held that the plaintiff’s employment could not be viewed as cyclical given the fact he had worked almost 15 years without interruption, having only been laid off once prior to that.
The court further held that being an hourly worker did not prevent him from being entitled to reasonable notice in accordance with the common law, and he was not, by this fact, restricted only to the statutory notice period set out in the LSA.
He was awarded 10 months’ pay and benefits in lieu of notice as opposed to the eight weeks he would have been entitled to under the provisions of the LSA.
