Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 JANUARY 2017

The Employee Doth Protest The Right Amount: Implementing Changes To Employment Contracts

McMillan LLP
McMillan LLP
Contributor
McMillan LLP

McMillan LLP

The firm : McMillan LLP is one of Canada’s leading national law firms with offices in Montreal,...

View firm profile
Explore more from McMillan LLP

The Court was clear that an employer must proceed with caution if an employee objects to proposed changes to the terms and conditions of employment.

CanadaEmployment and HR

In the recent decision of Lionel Polard v. ARO Inc.1, the Supreme Court of British Columbia revisited the issue of determining if an employee’s conduct resulted in the acceptance of altered terms and conditions of employment. The Court was clear that an employer must proceed with caution if an employee objects to proposed changes to the terms and conditions of employment.

Background Facts

Polard had an employment agreement with Aro Inc. (“Aro”) that included a provision that the agreement could only be modified by a written agreement between both parties. The agreement also stated that a waiver of a provision of the agreement would not be effective unless it was in writing and signed by the party waiving the right.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from