Skip to content

Client Update: New Forms of Unpaid Leave under Newfoundland and Labrador Labour Standards Act

What’s new?

Our employer clients will be familiar with the Labour Standards Act, which sets out the employment standards applicable in Newfoundland and Labrador. Two amendments were made to the legislation this week, both of which came into effect on December 10, 2013. These establish new categories of unpaid leave from employment for an employee:

  • Whose child has disappeared or died as a result of a crime.
  • Whose child is critically ill.

How does an employee qualify for these leaves and how much leave is available?
If an employee has been working with the employer for at least 30 days, they may take an unpaid leave of absence for:

  • Up to 104 weeks if an employee’s child has died, or up to 52 weeks if the employee’s child has disappeared, and it is probable in the circumstances that the death or disappearance was the result of a crime. There is an exception to this rule if the employee is the person charged with the crime.
  • Up to 37 weeks of unpaid leave to the employee parent or guardian of a child who is critically ill (as certified by a physician).

Employer obligations during and after the leave
During these new leaves, the employer is prohibited from dismissing the employee for reasons relating to the leave. If the employee is terminated during the leave, the employer bears a higher responsibility to demonstrate that it was unrelated to the unpaid leave. Employers must provide equivalent, or better, terms and conditions of employment upon the employee’s return to work.

Can the new leaves be combined with other leaves?
These new forms of employee leave are in addition to previously existing compassionate care leave, which provides for up to eight weeks of unpaid leave where a family member is terminally ill and has a significant risk of death in the short term. The death of an employee’s child will likely also entitle that person to bereavement leave in accordance with the other relevant provisions of the Act.

What can an employer require from an employee asking for leave?
The employee is required to provide two weeks’ notice of his or her intent to take leave, unless there is a valid reason why that notice cannot be given. Employers may also seek verification that the employee is entitled to leave. In the case of critical illness leave, the Act expressly contemplates a physician’s certification of the need for, and duration of, the leave. The total length of the new types of unpaid leave is always limited to what is “reasonably necessary in the circumstances”.

What does “reasonably necessary in the circumstances” mean?
The new provisions require employers to make judgment calls as to what is reasonable, or where the employee is entitled to leave. For instance, trial and conviction for a violent crime that may have resulted in a child’s death will usually not take place for some time after the death or disappearance itself. However, if a criminal investigation results and/or if charges are laid in connection with a child’s death or disappearance, an employee may well be entitled to take unpaid leave.

The foregoing is intended for general information only. We are always available to assist you in the event that one of your employees makes a request for leave under these, or any, provisions of the Act.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

April 22, 2016

By Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top