Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So why haven't you gone to a lawyer and done it, instead of getting your legal advise from an Internet forum?
Yes Ralph_Kirk but you still have to pay until you've won.
If you've ever been involved in labour law cases, you'd see that they can be very long as the oppressor will purposely do anything they can to run the clock because time is money and they know you have less money than them.
And after all, what are forums for but to ask questions, in hopes that someone might have the answer.
Given I would have evidence, the lawsuit against me would pay for my costs to defend myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
So why haven't you gone to a lawyer and done it, instead of getting your legal advise from an Internet forum?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnCloseInspection
Yes Ralph_Kirk but you still have to pay until you've won.
If you've ever been involved in labour law cases, you'd see that they can be very long as the oppressor will purposely do anything they can to run the clock because time is money and they know you have less money than them.
And after all, what are forums for but to ask questions, in hopes that someone might have the answer.
A lawyer who agreed that the case is as much of a slam-dunk as you think it is is would work on contingency. You don't know unless you ask.
Then you can come back here and complain that the lawyer wanted money up front.
Laws to prevent publishing the truth? Not any that I know of. But I suggest that you be able to prove it is the absolute truth and not just your opinion or you get into the area of restraint of trade.
If you are a physician or therapist there are professional standards, but those are not laws.
Be aware that few of the posters here are from Canada, so your odds of getting a legal answer from a lawyer who works within the Canadian legal system are just about zip. If you need a legal answer about Canadian labor laws and Canadian libel laws, I suggest that you make an appointment with a lawyer and ask him.
If seems to me that because the labor board and your own union have already ruled against you, you are going to have a difficult time proving your case.
....... I would think that the term "wrongfully terminated" would be enough for you.
But you want the employers' FULL reason for terminating me.
Well I wanted to have the FULL reason too.
Instead they fired me using a rule that didn't exist.
It could have been any reason in the world BUT the point is the employer's FULL reason, the rule they used DID NOT EXIST!
Happy now Zoisite.
No, I'm not happy. I was suspicious and doubtful about your whole story from the get go because of your statement indicating that not only do you want to expose the employers, management and union officers, you also want to infringe on the privacy of other employees and consequently on people who are innocent:
Quote:
"Can you not just publicize the names of the employers, management, employees and the union officers that were complicit in the wrongful termination?"
That sounds just way too fishy to me. Now I am even more suspicious and doubtful and I think you're on a revenge vendetta about something that didn't occur the way you think/say it did and apparently you don't care about consequences of publication and exposure effecting the uninvolved innocent employees who work there. What you want to do does not just effect only the people that you feel have wronged you, it will effect everybody who works there.
I don't believe your story, but be that as it may you only asked about privacy laws and not about warnings of the consequences of rashness so I will desist now.
Here is some information for you about the Canada Privacy Acts, it has some information about both the Federal and Provincial Privacy Laws in Canada and you can make of it whatever you can garner from it. Perhaps it can lead you to other lines of information that are more helpful.
In addition, "loser pays" is not guaranteed or whole. Also keep in mind this risk applies to both sides and I've seen plenty of people lose who thought they had a "slam dunk" case.
Historically, under the English system, successful litigants were awarded approximately 40-50% of their actual legal expenses. The purpose behind the policy was to:
Discourage frivolous claims,
Encourage settlement of meritorious claims, and
Allow a party that has successfully defended a claim to recover a portion of its legal costs.
Judges have discretion to determine the amount of costs as well as the method for determining those costs based on several factors. Some of these factors include:
The parties’ conduct during the litigation,
The complexity of the case,
The amount involved, and
The importance of the case to the parties and society generally.
It is very unusual for a party to be awarded all of its legal costs—referred to as full indemnity or solicitor-client costs. Full indemnity cost awards are rare and generally reserved for exceptional cases where a party’s behaviour was dishonest, scandalous or outrageous.
As a long time union official dealing often with cases of wrongful dismissal and filing any number of grievances ending up in arbitration, I will neither attempt to dissect the veracity of your claims or to educate you about the various libel laws.
I will however state that as far as I am aware, all provinces have among their labour relations acts, articles governing things such as "misrepresentation" or "failure to represent". The thing you must remember is that the parties you are accusing must be shown to have acted in bad faith as Oceangaia has described and not simply been remiss in some obscure way of gathering of facts. Some as in the province of Ontario even go so far as to require Unions to go to bat for non-union employees if there are infractions being committed against them in contravention of labour codes by an employer of an organized shop,
Most Unions of any note are very aware of their fiduciary responsibilities, with no national or international union content to leave the governance of their locals to those who might bring risk to their financial well being or standing reputation.
Having said all of that; "IF" as you state, you feel you have factual proof of your claims; you can seek a legal opinion from any number of labour lawyers who will be above board in telling you whether you have a case or not.
No, I'm not happy. I was suspicious and doubtful about your whole story from the get go because of your statement indicating that not only do you want to expose the employers, management and union officers, you also want to infringe on the privacy of other employees and consequently on people who are innocent:
That sounds just way too fishy to me. Now I am even more suspicious and doubtful and I think you're on a revenge vendetta about something that didn't occur the way you think/say it did and apparently you don't care about consequences of publication and exposure effecting the uninvolved innocent employees who work there. What you want to do does not just effect only the people that you feel have wronged you, it will effect everybody who works there.
I don't believe your story, but be that as it may you only asked about privacy laws and not about warnings of the consequences of rashness so I will desist now.
Here is some information for you about the Canada Privacy Acts, it has some information about both the Federal and Provincial Privacy Laws in Canada and you can make of it whatever you can garner from it. Perhaps it can lead you to other lines of information that are more helpful.
You seem mentally ill Zoiste or just can't stand the idea that corruption can be so ingrained into unions, employers or labour boards and so on.
A simple request about privacy laws and you go off on a tangent of not believing the scenario and going even further by seeing things that don't exist.
Infringe on the privacy of innocent individuals?
Where the hell did you get that idea from?
This is about corrupt individuals Zoiste. Not innocent people.
You act like you have a dog in the fight.
You have a very disturbing outlook Zoiste. You must work in Human Resources.
As for your link to the Canada Privacy Acts... old news. I've already used FOIP and PIPEDA.
Tossing me a link like that is like pointing to the Law Library, the right direction but hardly specific enough for easy answers.
Looks like you haven't been around the block enough Zoiste.
I was suspicious of you from the get go when you bragged about knowing more about corruption within unions and employer than me.
You're out of your league Zoiste.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
