Employment dispute help in Toronto, for employees and employers, in English or Farsi
An employment relationship can go wrong in a lot of different ways, and it can go wrong for either side. An employee can be let go without notice, given a severance offer that looks lower than what they are actually owed, or pushed into a workplace that has become unworkable through a demotion, a pay cut, or ongoing harassment. An employer can be facing a departing employee who is threatening a lawsuit, a former manager who insists they were terminated for cause when the paper trail does not support it, or a human rights complaint that needs to be answered carefully and on time. At Gambriani Law PC, we work with clients on both sides of employment disputes across North York, Toronto, and the wider Greater Toronto Area, and we do this work in English or Farsi, whichever language lets you discuss the details most comfortably.
Employment law in Ontario sits at the intersection of several different sources: the common law of wrongful dismissal built up through decades of court decisions, the Employment Standards Act, 2000, which sets out minimum standards that cannot be contracted below, and the Human Rights Code, which protects employees against discrimination and harassment connected to specific personal characteristics. Knowing which of these applies, and how they interact, often makes the difference between an offer that is genuinely fair and one that undersells what a person is entitled to, or between a termination that will hold up and one that exposes an employer to significant liability.
This guide walks through the most common employment disputes we see: wrongful dismissal, termination pay and severance, constructive dismissal, termination for cause, and workplace human rights complaints, along with how these disputes typically get resolved. It is written to give you a general, accurate picture of Ontario employment law, not to replace advice about your specific situation, which will always depend on your particular facts, your employment contract, and your history with the employer or employee involved.
Wrongful dismissal and termination without cause
In Ontario, most employees are considered to be employed on an indefinite basis, meaning there is no fixed end date to the job. Either the employer or the employee can end that relationship at any time, for almost any reason, provided the reason is not discriminatory or otherwise unlawful. What the law requires, absent a valid reason amounting to just cause, is that the employer give the employee reasonable notice of the termination, or pay in lieu of that notice. A dismissal becomes wrongful not because the employer lacked a reason to let someone go, but because the employee was not given the notice, or the pay instead of notice, that the law says they were owed.
Reasonable notice is not a fixed formula
Unless an employment contract validly limits an employee's entitlement to a lesser amount, Ontario courts determine reasonable notice by weighing several factors from the well-known case of Bardal v. Globe & Mail:
- The character of the employment, meaning the nature of the role and its seniority.
- The length of service with the employer.
- The age of the employee at the time of termination.
- The availability of similar employment, given the employee's experience, training, and qualifications.
There is no set formula tying years of service to a fixed number of weeks. Instead, each case is assessed on its own facts, and the same length of service can result in quite different notice periods depending on the person's role, age, and prospects of finding comparable work.
Why the amount can matter so much
Because reasonable notice is assessed individually, the gap between what an employer initially offers and what an employee may actually be entitled to under the common law can be significant, sometimes amounting to many months of additional pay. For employers, this means a termination that looks routine on paper can carry real financial exposure if the offer does not reflect a proper assessment of the Bardal factors. For employees, it means an initial severance offer is a starting point for a conversation, not necessarily the final word on what is owed.
Employment contracts can change the analysis
Many employment contracts include a termination clause that limits an employee's entitlement on dismissal to something less than full common-law notice, often to the Employment Standards Act minimums. Whether such a clause is enforceable is its own question, and Ontario courts have struck down many termination clauses over the years for failing to meet the Act's minimum requirements in every possible scenario. Where a termination clause is found to be unenforceable, the employee's entitlement reverts to the common-law analysis described above.
Termination pay and severance pay
Termination pay and severance pay are often used interchangeably in everyday conversation, but under Ontario's Employment Standards Act, 2000 (the ESA), they are two distinct and separate entitlements, and not every dismissed employee qualifies for both.
Termination pay under the ESA
Termination pay is the minimum notice, or pay in lieu of notice, that the ESA requires for most employees who are let go without cause. The amount is based on length of service:
- Employees with less than one year of service are generally entitled to one week's notice or pay.
- Employees with one to two years of service are entitled to two weeks.
- The entitlement increases by roughly one week for each additional year of service, up to a maximum of eight weeks after eight or more years.
These are minimums, and they apply regardless of what an employment contract says, unless a specific exemption applies.
Severance pay is a separate, additional entitlement
Severance pay is a further, distinct entitlement under the ESA, owed on top of termination pay, but only where certain conditions are met: generally, the employee must have five or more years of service, and the employer must either have an Ontario payroll of $2.5 million or more, or have severed the employment of 50 or more employees within a six-month period due to a permanent discontinuance of business. Where it applies, severance pay is calculated at one week's pay per year of service, to a maximum of 26 weeks. Not every long-service employee automatically qualifies, since the employer's payroll size is part of the test.
How the ESA minimums compare with common-law notice
Termination pay and severance pay under the ESA are floors, not ceilings. Where an employee's termination clause is unenforceable, or where there simply is no valid clause limiting their entitlement, the common-law analysis described in the previous section applies instead, and it frequently results in a considerably higher figure than the ESA minimums alone. Understanding which regime governs your situation, the ESA minimums, an enforceable contractual notice period, or full common-law reasonable notice, is usually the first and most consequential question in any severance discussion, whether you are the one being let go or the one doing the letting go.
Constructive dismissal
Not every dismissal looks like a termination meeting or a letter ending the employment relationship outright. Sometimes an employer changes the job so significantly, without the employee's agreement, that the employee is entitled to treat the relationship as over and claim the same damages they would receive on an outright dismissal. This is called constructive dismissal, and it can be one of the more difficult situations to assess, because from the outside, the employee appears to have resigned.
Two ways a constructive dismissal can arise
Ontario courts generally recognize two routes to a finding of constructive dismissal. The first is a single, unilateral change to an essential term of the employment, significant enough that a reasonable person in the employee's position would consider the fundamental nature of the job to have been changed. The second is a course of conduct by the employer that, taken as a whole, demonstrates the employer no longer intends to be bound by the terms of the employment relationship, even without one single dramatic breach.
Common examples
- A significant, unilateral cut to pay or a change in how compensation is structured.
- A demotion, or a substantial reduction in duties, responsibilities, or reporting relationship.
- A significant change in work location that meaningfully increases the burden on the employee.
- A temporary layoff imposed where the employment contract does not give the employer the right to lay employees off.
- A pattern of conduct, such as ongoing harassment or a hostile change in treatment, that undermines the working relationship.
Whether any particular change amounts to constructive dismissal depends heavily on the specific facts, including what the employment contract says and how the change was communicated and implemented.
Acting promptly, without acting rashly
An employee who believes they have been constructively dismissed generally needs to raise the issue and treat the employment as at an end within a reasonable period, rather than continuing to work under the changed terms for an extended stretch without objection, which can be taken as acceptance of the new terms. At the same time, resigning the moment a change is announced, without understanding whether it actually meets the legal threshold, carries its own risk. This is exactly the kind of situation where getting advice quickly, before resigning or before responding to a resignation, tends to matter most.
Termination for cause
When an employer terminates an employee for cause, it is asserting that the employee's conduct was so serious that it justifies ending the employment relationship immediately, without notice or pay in lieu of notice, and without severance. Because the consequences for the employee are severe, Ontario courts hold employers to a high threshold before accepting that just cause existed, and the burden of proving it rests entirely with the employer.
A contextual, high threshold
Courts assess just cause contextually, looking at the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the surrounding circumstances, and whether the misconduct is fundamentally incompatible with the employee's obligations to the employer, such that the employment relationship cannot reasonably continue. A single mistake, a performance shortfall, or even a serious lapse in judgment does not automatically meet this threshold; the question is whether the conduct, viewed in context, amounts to a fundamental breakdown of the employment relationship.
Conduct that can support just cause
- Serious dishonesty, such as theft, fraud, or falsifying records, particularly where it involves a breach of trust central to the role.
- Serious insubordination, such as a clear and deliberate refusal to follow a lawful and reasonable instruction.
- Serious harassment or workplace violence directed at coworkers or clients.
- A pattern of documented performance problems, where the employer has given clear warnings, a reasonable opportunity to improve, and the problems have continued.
Conduct that usually does not
Isolated incidents, minor policy violations, personality conflicts, or performance issues that have never been clearly communicated to the employee rarely meet the threshold on their own. Employers who terminate for cause without a solid factual record, and without having followed a fair process beforehand, often find that the termination is later treated as a termination without cause, meaning the employee becomes entitled to notice or pay in lieu after all, sometimes with added exposure because of how the termination was handled. For this reason, we generally recommend that employers get advice before telling an employee they are being terminated for cause, not after, and that employees who have been terminated for cause have their file reviewed rather than accepting the characterization at face value.
Workplace human rights, discrimination, and harassment
Ontario's Human Rights Code protects employees from discrimination and harassment in the workplace connected to certain protected personal characteristics, and it applies at every stage of employment, from hiring and promotion through to discipline and termination. A dispute involving discrimination or harassment often overlaps with a wrongful dismissal claim, but it engages a different legal framework and, in many cases, a different forum.
Protected grounds
The Code prohibits discrimination in employment on a specific list of protected grounds, including:
- Race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, and citizenship
- Creed (religion)
- Sex, including pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression
- Age, marital status, and family status
- Disability, including physical and mental health conditions
Discrimination does not need to be the only reason for a decision to be unlawful; if a protected ground is a factor in an employer's decision, that can be enough to establish a Code violation.
What this can look like in practice
Discrimination at work can be direct, such as a comment tying a decision to someone's age or family status, or it can show up more subtly, in patterns of assignment, discipline, or promotion that disadvantage people who share a protected characteristic. Harassment involves a course of vexatious comment or conduct connected to a protected ground that is known, or ought reasonably to be known, to be unwelcome. Employers also have a duty to accommodate employees with disabilities and other protected needs, up to the point of undue hardship, which can require changes to duties, schedules, or the physical workplace.
Bringing or responding to a complaint
Employees who believe they have experienced discrimination or harassment connected to a protected ground can bring an application to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, generally within one year of the last incident, though extensions are sometimes available. Employers facing a human rights application need to respond within a set deadline and should treat the process seriously from the outset, since the Tribunal can order remedies including compensation for lost wages and for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect. Because a human rights claim can proceed alongside, or instead of, a wrongful dismissal claim, it is worth having both angles assessed together rather than in isolation.
Resolving an employment dispute
Most employment disputes do not end up in a courtroom, and the process for resolving one usually starts well before any claim is filed, regardless of whether you are the employee or the employer.
Starting with a review and a demand
On the employee side, the first step is typically a careful review of the termination, the employment contract, and the offer on the table, followed by a demand letter setting out what is actually owed and inviting the employer to resolve the matter without litigation. On the employer side, this might mean responding to a demand letter, reassessing an offer in light of a properly conducted analysis, or getting ahead of a dispute by having a termination reviewed for risk before it happens. A meaningful share of employment disputes resolve at this stage, without either side needing to start a formal legal proceeding.
Where a claim can be brought
Where a matter does not resolve through negotiation, there are several possible venues, and which one applies depends on the nature of the claim:
- Small Claims Court, for wrongful dismissal claims up to $35,000, which is often suitable for shorter-service employees.
- The Superior Court of Justice, for larger wrongful dismissal claims and more complex disputes.
- A complaint to the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, for enforcement of ESA minimums such as unpaid termination or severance pay, though pursuing this route can affect the ability to also sue for common-law notice.
- The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, for claims involving discrimination or harassment connected to a protected ground.
Choosing the right venue, and understanding how choosing one can affect your ability to pursue another, is an important strategic decision early in a dispute.
Why most disputes settle
As in most areas of civil litigation, cost, time, and uncertainty push the large majority of employment disputes toward a negotiated resolution rather than a full hearing or trial, often through direct negotiation between counsel, and sometimes through mediation. That said, being prepared to escalate a matter when a fair resolution is not on offer, and being seen to be prepared, is frequently what makes a reasonable settlement possible in the first place, whichever side of the table you are sitting on.
How Gambriani Law approaches employment disputes
Employment disputes rarely look identical from one file to the next, even when the underlying facts sound similar on the surface, and the right approach depends on your specific contract, your history with the workplace, and what you are realistically trying to achieve. At Gambriani Law PC, our starting point in any employment matter is to understand the facts clearly, assess where you actually stand under the ESA and the common law, and lay out the realistic options available, rather than assuming a general description of "wrongful dismissal" or "severance" applies neatly to your situation.
Working with employees and employers
We advise both employees navigating a termination, a severance offer, or a workplace dispute, and employers who need help managing a termination properly, responding to a claim, or reviewing an employment contract before a dispute ever arises. Seeing both sides of these disputes informs how we approach each one: understanding what an employer is likely weighing helps in advising an employee, and understanding what a court is likely to expect of an employer helps in advising an employer.
Bilingual representation, in English or Farsi
Gambriani Law PC serves clients across North York, Toronto, and the Greater Toronto Area in both English and Farsi. For Persian-speaking clients, that means being able to review an employment contract, a termination letter, or correspondence with an employer, and to discuss your options and next steps, in the language you are most comfortable using, without anything getting lost in translation at a moment when precision matters.
No two employment disputes unfold the same way, and how any particular matter resolves depends on its own facts, the other side's position, and decisions made along the way that cannot be predicted in advance. What we can offer is a clear, prepared assessment of your specific situation and straightforward communication about your options at each stage, whether you are an employee weighing a severance offer or an employer trying to manage a termination the right way.