Upcoming Webinar: September 8, 2022 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | Working through identity issues in workplace investigations Register Today!
Reflections and news direct from Rubin Thomlinson.
Subscribe to receive updates of interest to you.
Filtered By:
I have been an adjudicator for four different administrative tribunals over the course of more than 20 years. This experience has served me well since I have found that many adjudicative skills are transferable to investigations.
In a recent blog post, I discussed a case where the Ontario Superior Court found an investigation to be inadequate and unfair because it was based on rumour, gossip, and hearsay, and ultimately resulted in the employer making an unjustified and costly decision to terminate an employee’s position.
In the summer of 2020, there was an incident involving a City of Toronto Municipal Standards Officer, Michael Rushton, and two Black women, Eva Amo-Mensah and Deborah Ampong (the “complainants”).
As awareness and understanding of gender diversity grows, more transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming persons are feeling supported and empowered to express their gender identities in the workplace.
It is readily acknowledged that the origins of “Pride” started on June 28, 1969, when police officers raided New York City’s Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, beating and harassing bar patrons and arresting 13 employees who were considered in violation of various gendered state legislation.
Like many of you, over the last couple of years, I have been hearing the buzz around the ban of the now controversial critical race theory (CRT) from some of our neighbours south of the border.
A lot of work goes into producing an investigation report that is well-written and well-reasoned. But the finished product is more than just a set of words—it is also a visual experience for the reader. While visual elements such as white space and word font certainly enhance readability, in this blog post I focus on the communicative power of visual aids (images, tables, charts, etc.) and provide some best practices for including them in investigation reports.
Si l’année 2022 nous a déjà fourni amples sujets de discussions tels que la gifle de Will Smith aux Oscars, ou encore le procès en diffamation de Johnny Depp, la récente décision de la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario dans l’affaire Render v. ThyssenKrupp Elevator (Canada) Limited, 2022 ONCA 310 (CanLII), rejoint, à mon avis, aisément ce palmarès.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2022
