A dismissed employee in a tariff exposed industry may be facing an entirely different employment market from someone who held an identical job a few years earlier. A production manager could have the same age, tenure and responsibilities as a former colleague, yet discover that the factories where those skills are most useful have stopped hiring. Meanwhile, a comparable professional working in a growing sector of the same province might have a very different range of choices. Both may have been treated unfairly by an employer. That doesn't make their legal entitlement the same. It raises a more interesting question than whether Canada's weakening economy will make severance more expensive. Is the availability of comparable employment becoming the Bardal factor through which world events enter the reasonable notice analysis? The doctrine has been familiar since Bardal v Globe & Mail Ltd in 1960. When an enforceable contract doesn't determine notice and the common law applies, courts consider the character of employment, length of service, age and availability of similar employment in light of experience, training and qualifications.
This is a preview. Full access remains subject to the reading allowance or membership.