Skip to content

Temporary lay off timeline extended to 26 weeks from 13… temporarily

Twila Reid and John Samms

On Friday, June 12, 2020, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador announced it has extended the time period under section 50 of the Labour Standards Act (“the Act”) that converts a temporary layoff into a permanent termination.

The Order doubles the amount of time a person may be considered to have been temporarily laid off to 26 weeks from 13 weeks, so long as that timeframe is captured within a period of 33 consecutive weeks between March 18 and September 18, 2020. If a worker receives pay during the 33 week period, the number of days for which the employee is paid does not count toward the 26 week lay-off period. The deadline to make a complaint is extended to 12 months from the date the employee’s contract is terminated (the previous deadline was 6 months).

This is a temporary change as the Act itself has not been amended. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council made the Order through the Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Order, made under the power of section 6 of the Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Act, a creature of the provincial government’s COVID-19 response that impacts a myriad of statutory deadlines.

This move may temporarily ease some of the pressure on employers as the normal operation of the Act would have employers facing decisions to permanently terminate employees even though many businesses cannot operate as a result of ongoing COVID-19 restrictions. This change allows employers to take more time to consider how best to bring employees back to work or adjust their business in accordance with the so-called “new normal”.

Employers should seek specific legal advice to understand how the above Order is applicable to their particular circumstances, including what further notice(s) if any they should provide to laid off employees.

The Order, as published in the Gazette, states as follows:

The Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Order is amended by adding immediately after section 4 the following:

4.1(1) Notwithstanding section 50 of the Labour Standards Act, where an employer temporarily lays off an employee on or after March 18, 2020 and before September 18, 2020 and the lay-off exceeds 26 weeks in a period of 33 consecutive weeks, the employee shall, for the purposes of Part X of that Act be considered to have been terminated at the beginning of the 26 week period.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a day during the period of 33 consecutive weeks for which an employee receives pay, including pay the employee receives for a public holiday occurring during that period, shall not be counted in the calculation of the 26 week lay-off period set out in subsection (1).

(3) Where the 6 month period referred to in subsection 62(3) of the Labour Standards Act falls on or after March 18, 2020 and before September 18, 2020, a person may, notwithstanding subsection 62(3) of that Act, file a complaint within 12 months of the date the employee’s contract is terminated.


This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership articles and updates.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Universal interest arbitration proposed for New Brunswick

April 5, 2016

On March 29, 2016, the Province of New Brunswick tabled proposed changes to the Industrial Relations Act and the Public Services Labour Relations Act. If passed, these changes would dramatically alter well-established principles of private sector collective bargaining.…

Read More

Good Faith Fisheries: New case on Crown consultation & regulation of Aboriginal fisheries

March 22, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Why is this case a big deal? It started with two salmon. Now, after several years of litigation, the Nova Scotia Provincial Court in R v Martin, 2016 NSPC 14 has stayed proceedings against…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Winter 2016

March 10, 2016

THE EDITORS’ CORNER Michelle Black and Sean Kelly One day, the line between mental and physical disabilities may not be so pronounced, but, for now, distinctions are still drawn between Employee A with, for example, diabetes and…

Read More

Hiring the “Right” Employee

February 24, 2016

By Lisa Gallivan Employees can be your biggest asset, if you hire the right people. This can often be one of the biggest decisions that you make as a business owner or employer. The “right” employee…

Read More

Bye, Bye Canadian P.I.?: What Apple’s fight against the FBI means for the protection of Personal Information in Canada

February 23, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Kathleen Leighton Order Up: Apple, P.I. Recently, the public safety versus personal privacy debate has been brought to main headlines. Apple is facing a court order (available here) requiring the company to assist the FBI in the investigation of…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2016 Proxy Season

February 12, 2016

In preparing for the 2016 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to and interactions with your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Left Sharks and Copy Cats: The Super Bowl’s Impact on Protecting a Brand

February 5, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Michael MacIsaac You remember Left Shark… The Super Bowl is a lot of things to a lot of people and is arguably the most anticipated event of the year that is not a holiday…

Read More

The Labour Relations of First Nations’ Fisheries: Who gets to decide?

February 2, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Summary The Canada Industrial Relations Board recently held that it had no jurisdiction as a federal board to certify a bargaining unit comprised of fisheries employees of the Waycobah First Nation. The decision…

Read More

Can an employer prohibit tattoos and piercings?

January 21, 2016

By Peter McLellan, QC In the 1970s the issue for employers was long hair and sideburns. In the 1980’s it was earrings for men. Today the employer’s concerns are with tattoos and facial piercings. What are…

Read More

Settling for it: Two new NS decisions on settlement agreements and releases

January 15, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction It sounds simple: Two disputing parties, hoping to resolve their disagreement without drawn-out court proceedings, will mutually agree to a settlement on clear terms; release each other from all claims; and move…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top