Article content
We often read about toxic bosses. What about their employee equivalents? I’m referring to the employee who wants to extract as much money from the company for as little work as possible and is prepared to go to any means to do so.
This section was produced by the editorial department. The client was not given the opportunity to put restrictions on the content or review it prior to publication.
by Workday
We often read about toxic bosses. What about their employee equivalents? I’m referring to the employee who wants to extract as much money from the company for as little work as possible and is prepared to go to any means to do so.
Article content
Article content
In fact, given the abundance of social legislation supporting employees, they have ample available (often governmental) helping hands enabling them to do so.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
or
Article content
What can an employer do? Here’s a list of common scenarios and how best to navigate them.
In Ontario, an employee is entitled to overtime at time and a half if the employer permits them to work more than 44 hours per week. In other provinces and federally, it is 40 hours.
What does one do about an employee who creates and submits fictitious “records” of their hours, often after they are fired. I have seen those overtime hours add up to more than the employee’s salary!
Many employers are flummoxed. The employment standards branch, to which the employee complains to obtain that time and a half, requires employers to keep records of employees’ time and, if they have not created those records as required, will presumptively accept the employee’s version.
Calling evidence to disprove the employee’s recording that they were working at specific times can be difficult and sometimes impossible.
The best technique to protect themselves is to have a written memo, signed by everyone, advising that employees are prohibited from ever working over those 44 hours a week without the employer’s written consent.
Work
FP Work touches on HR strategy, labour economics, office culture, technology and more.
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Thanks for signing up!
A welcome email is on its way. If you don’t see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Work will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Article content
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
If an employer does that, unless the employee can prove the employer was wilfully blind and observed all of this overtime being worked and permitted it, the employer will have protected itself.
Many employees combine long weekends and compliant doctors to obtain illegitimate paid vacations, taking time off work just because they wish to. If the employer has a paid sick leave policy, the employees will be paid for those days. Subject to certain statutory exceptions in some provinces, there is no inherent obligation for employers to pay for sick days. Still, most medium and large employers will pay, at least for some number of days per year.
Often other employees will know if a co-worker has a practice of falsely making such claims and will resent having to work when that employee does not. This affects morale as well as productivity.
What is the solution? In the provinces that permit employers to demand medical notes, require one so the employee cannot spend a day of leisure or at the cottage but instead must attend the doctor’s office. If you suspect that the employee is not genuinely ill, contact them to ask relevant business questions to ensure that they are engaged and prevent them from having a real holiday.
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Finally, if a particular employee has a pattern of suspicious absences, have their doctor list their limitations and functionalities and require them to work within that modified job description. At last resort, if you believe they are not disabled at all, have them attend an independent medical examination with a doctor you retain and then insist on compliance with that doctor’s recommendation.
Of course, some employees can pretend to be working by simply staying near their phones but provide little value because, in the absence of supervision, they are not working at all.
One solution is to install software that monitors their keyboards to ensure they are productive.
Another is to order them back to work where they have to attend the office (and cannot take their dogs for a walk or watch that daytime soap).
To answer the unspoken question: yes, you can order back to work those who are not effectively working from home — whether it be because they are simply not working or because they are ineffective in that modality — while allowing employees who are effectively working from home to continue doing so. And yes, that is discrimination, but it is legal discrimination.
Advertisement 5
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Some employees push their employers, including in the ways discussed above, hoping to be fired. They misbehave hoping their misconduct will be rewarded.
What can employers do?
Start documenting their activity and providing warnings. If the employee miscalculates, you might well develop a case for cause, or at least give the employee the perception that they could lose such a case, which will make them ultimately change their conduct, or take less if you terminate them. You can also assign them duties that minimize the ill effect of their conduct — duties that would not amount to a constructive dismissal. And you can warn them that continued misconduct will affect their reference. References can last for one’s entire career.
Employees can make claims without any foundation, such as to human rights, occupational health and safety and/or to human rights. This is often done in the hope of provoking a firing.
The problem is that retaliating by firing them is itself a violation of these statutes, so that is not a viable option.
Advertisement 6
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Another problem is that, even if the employer is successful, they cannot recover costs from the employee.
Recommended from Editorial
Some of these statutes have provisions whereby the cases can be dismissed on an early basis if they are frivolous. Again, although this cannot be threatened, as nothing can, there is nothing wrong with telling future employers about the employee’s history.
A disgruntled employee might disparage an employer on social media or just in conversation. It might even rise to the level of defamation, permitting a lawsuit or, depending on the context, be cause for dismissal without severance — sending a message to other malcontents.
Howard Levitt is senior partner of Levitt LLP, employment and labour lawyers with offices in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. He practices employment law in eight provinces and is the author of six books, including the Law of Dismissal in Canada.
Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.
Article content
Share this article in your social network