5,109
edits
Difference between revisions of "Employment Law Issues (9:V)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Employment Law Issues (9:V) (view source)
Revision as of 23:42, 29 December 2020
, 23:42, 29 December 2020→D. Post-Employment Issues
| Line 960: | Line 960: | ||
== D. Post-Employment Issues == | == D. Post-Employment Issues == | ||
=== | === 33. Restrictive Covenants === | ||
It is becoming increasingly common for employment contracts to include restrictive covenants that prevent former employees from doing certain things, including but not limited to: divulging company secrets, working for competitors, or setting up their own competing business. While restrictive covenants have historically applied to upper level employees, they are more and more common for all types of employees as specialization increases and more companies sell information as opposed to goods. | It is becoming increasingly common for employment contracts to include restrictive covenants that prevent former employees from doing certain things, including but not limited to: divulging company secrets, working for competitors, or setting up their own competing business. While restrictive covenants have historically applied to upper level employees, they are more and more common for all types of employees as specialization increases and more companies sell information as opposed to goods. | ||
| Line 973: | Line 973: | ||
The courts are unwilling to re-write restrictive covenants if they contain uncertain and ambiguous terms; these covenants are deemed prima facie unreasonable and unenforceable (''Shafron v KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc''). It can often be a simple matter to find an ambiguity: the length of time or geographic area might not be specified, or there may be a prohibition against soliciting clients that the employee did not work with, or the employer may have used a non-compete clause when a non-solicitation clause would have adequately protected their legitimate business interests. See ''Powell River Industrial Sheet Metal Contracting Inc. (P.R.I.S.M.) v Kramchynski'', 2016 BCSC 883. | The courts are unwilling to re-write restrictive covenants if they contain uncertain and ambiguous terms; these covenants are deemed prima facie unreasonable and unenforceable (''Shafron v KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc''). It can often be a simple matter to find an ambiguity: the length of time or geographic area might not be specified, or there may be a prohibition against soliciting clients that the employee did not work with, or the employer may have used a non-compete clause when a non-solicitation clause would have adequately protected their legitimate business interests. See ''Powell River Industrial Sheet Metal Contracting Inc. (P.R.I.S.M.) v Kramchynski'', 2016 BCSC 883. | ||
=== | === 34. Record of Employment and Reference Letters === | ||
There is no statutory requirement under the ''ESA'' for an employer to provide a reference. Employers are required to provide former employees with a record of employment, which includes information such as the length of service, wage rate, but does not include anything about the employee’s performance. | There is no statutory requirement under the ''ESA'' for an employer to provide a reference. Employers are required to provide former employees with a record of employment, which includes information such as the length of service, wage rate, but does not include anything about the employee’s performance. | ||
