• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Harrasment in public..Hydro One fires "jerk" for reporter prank

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
41
Points
530
recceguy said:
So let's stop talking about this jerks rights and start talking about the reporters rights.

He may have been a jerk, but under Canadian law he is still entitled to all the rights the rest of us (including murders, rapists and other criminals) are entitled too.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
450
Points
1,010
Oldgateboatdriver said:
OK, lets talk about the reporter rights: In the circumstances she was in, she had the right to the protection of the criminal code and of any applicable municipal By-laws. That's it that's all.

Did she have a right to any protection under the OHSA? No, not from Hydro-One she didn't; not from Toronto FC she didn't; not from the owner of BMO field she didn't.

Her rights under the OHSA only bind her own employer and any person retaining the services of her employer. That's it and that's all.

Under OHSA or any similar legislation, If the employer conclude that a journalist (female or male) is in danger or will be exposed to improper treatment in any area where they send the journalists, they can do two things: Not send the journalist or provide the journalist with security apparatus appropriate to the circumstances. But they have no right to against the source of the "danger" other than those existing for the population at large.

Can a cop sent out to arrest criminal ask that the criminal be "enjoined" from using a gun? No. Can he ask his own employer for a bullet proof vest, a gun and back up? Yes.

Can an ambulance driver sent to a winter accident scene ask for the municipality to be ordered to clear snow and ice from his path? No. Can she ask for his ambulance company to provide her with chains for her tires? Yes.

There is BTW no such thing as the whole world being an "extended workplace" just because one of your employee works there. The whole City of Toronto is not Metro Police's "extended work place". Under OHSA, extended workplace is a remote workplace, other than the regular/owned/rented one of the employer, where the employer has control over the actual situation. The usual example is the place where a construction crew works. It's not the construction company's facility but it is a facility where the employer can and must deploy all the usual worksite safety measures.

So let's stop stretching non applicable concept of "workplace safety" here just to support a pet theory on employees (of Hydro-One) contractual obligations to their employers.

And, BTW, this guy was not "off-duty". You and I, in the military may be "off-duty"; a flight attendant traveling on her company's airline but not part of the crew may be "off-duty", but ordinary employees in an ordinary setting are NOT off-duty. The butcher at your local food store is or any other such employee is either at work or not at work, but not off'duty, a term that applies, IMO, to only those that work in fields where we owe a personal protection or safety service to others who are not our "clients", such as cops, fireman, soldiers, airline flight crew, doctors para-medics, etc.

Thank you!  Finally someone who gets it! 

Larry Strong said:
Works for politicians as well......

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/05/22/alberta-premier-elect-notley-suspends-mla-elect-drever-after-homophobic-post-comes-to-light

Shared with the usual caveats...

Alberta Premier-elect Notley suspends MLA-elect Drever after homophobic post comes to light

Cheers
Larry

She kicked him out of her Caucus Larry, completely unrelated to this.  The MLA is suspended from the NDP caucus, not from the legislature. 

This is the equivalent of telling someone they can't sit at your table anymore, not that they don't have a seat.  The person in question is still and MLA and will still sit in the legislature. 
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
872
Points
860
Retired AF Guy said:
He may have been a jerk, but under Canadian law he is still entitled to all the rights the rest of us (including murders, rapists and other criminals) are entitled too.

Which one of those rights that he shares with them  has been violated?
 

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
41
Points
530
Crantor said:
Which one of those rights that he shares with them  has been violated?

A poor choice of words when I including criminals, but what I meant was that under the CA 1982 Canadian citizens are awarded the following rights:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

Fundamental freedoms

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
Larry Strong said:
Works for politicians as well......

Not all of them apparently. Our former mayor's conduct was "questionable". He's still on the City payroll as a councillor.

Oldgateboatdriver said:
Can an ambulance driver sent to a winter accident scene ask for the municipality to be ordered to clear snow and ice from his path? No. Can she ask for his ambulance company to provide her with chains for her tires? Yes.

In Toronto, we asked for winter tires, but the City still does not equip ambulances with them. ( Unless they had a change of mind after I retired, but I doubt it. ) We carry shovels.

Oldgateboatdriver said:
The butcher at your local food store is or any other such employee is either at work or not at work, but not off'duty, a term that applies, IMO, to only those that work in fields where we owe a personal protection or safety service to others who are not our "clients", such as cops, fireman, soldiers, airline flight crew, doctors para-medics, etc.

Although we had prescribed hours of duty, for the purpose of liability coverage, off-duty City of Toronto Paramedics are considered on-duty and deemed to be acting on behalf of the City of Toronto any time they render assistance to an ill or injured person(s) in Ontario.


 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
872
Points
860
Retired AF Guy said:
A poor choice of words when I including criminals, but what I meant was that under the CA 1982 Canadian citizens are awarded the following rights:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

Fundamental freedoms

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

I'm not sure how that right was violated either.  Keeping in mind that that freedom is not absolute in Canada.  But... He freely expressed his opinion and belief and now he is free to deal with the consequences.  He hasn't been jailed or anything.  And nothing prevented him from saying it. 

Just because we enjoy a certain freedom of speech and expression does not mean we can say what we want whenever or however we want to without consequence. 
 

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
41
Points
530
Crantor said:
I'm not sure how that right was violated either.  Keeping in mind that that freedom is not absolute in Canada.  But... He freely expressed his opinion and belief and now he is free to deal with the consequences.  He hasn't been jailed or anything.  And nothing prevented him from saying it.

Just because we enjoy a certain freedom of speech and expression does not mean we can say what we want whenever or however we want to without consequence.

You are right, here in Canada under the CA 1982 we don't not have an absolute right to freedoms, and they can be curtailed, but only by a court of law!

 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
872
Points
860
Retired AF Guy said:
You are right, here in Canada under the CA 1982 we don't not have an absolute right to freedoms, and they can be curtailed, but only by a court of law!.

Right.  And no one stopped him from saying what he said.
 

RedcapCrusader

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Fundamental Freedoms as outlined in the Charter only protects citizens from Government action to punish citizens for expressing themselves etc.

Your Fundamental Freedoms do not protect you from action by: a private organization or business, another private citizen, or any other non-governmental entity. That is why you can be fired for using your Freedom of Expression.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
195
Points
710
Oldgateboatdriver said:
OK, lets talk about the reporter rights: In the circumstances she was in, she had the right to the protection of the criminal code and of any applicable municipal By-laws. That's it that's all.

Did she have a right to any protection under the OHSA? No, not from Hydro-One she didn't; not from Toronto FC she didn't; not from the owner of BMO field she didn't.

Her rights under the OHSA only bind her own employer and any person retaining the services of her employer. That's it and that's all.

Under OHSA or any similar legislation, If the employer conclude that a journalist (female or male) is in danger or will be exposed to improper treatment in any area where they send the journalists, they can do two things: Not send the journalist or provide the journalist with security apparatus appropriate to the circumstances. But they have no right to against the source of the "danger" other than those existing for the population at large.

Can a cop sent out to arrest criminal ask that the criminal be "enjoined" from using a gun? No. Can he ask his own employer for a bullet proof vest, a gun and back up? Yes.

Can an ambulance driver sent to a winter accident scene ask for the municipality to be ordered to clear snow and ice from his path? No. Can she ask for his ambulance company to provide her with chains for her tires? Yes.

There is BTW no such thing as the whole world being an "extended workplace" just because one of your employee works there. The whole City of Toronto is not Metro Police's "extended work place". Under OHSA, extended workplace is a remote workplace, other than the regular/owned/rented one of the employer, where the employer has control over the actual situation. The usual example is the place where a construction crew works. It's not the construction company's facility but it is a facility where the employer can and must deploy all the usual worksite safety measures.

So let's stop stretching non applicable concept of "workplace safety" here just to support a pet theory on employees (of Hydro-One) contractual obligations to their employers.

And, BTW, this guy was not "off-duty". You and I, in the military may be "off-duty"; a flight attendant traveling on her company's airline but not part of the crew may be "off-duty", but ordinary employees in an ordinary setting are NOT off-duty. The butcher at your local food store is or any other such employee is either at work or not at work, but not off'duty, a term that applies, IMO, to only those that work in fields where we owe a personal protection or safety service to others who are not our "clients", such as cops, fireman, soldiers, airline flight crew, doctors para-medics, etc.

So, a whole lot of rhetoric to say that a worker is not protected, while punched in and away from the workplace proper, with the employers permission?

If that's the gist, you're wrong.

 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,367
Points
940
So is Hydro 1 going to fire all the executives and senior managers that caused the massive over billing because it brought the firm into disrepute? good for the Goose, good for the Gander, right? 
 

TCBF

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Colin P said:
So is Hydro 1 going to fire all the executives and senior managers that caused the massive over billing because it brought the firm into disrepute? good for the Goose, good for the Gander, right?

- Their corruption was polite, and tastefully done without publicly insulting women.
 

kratz

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
34
Points
630
I was thanked and walked to the door before being handed my bill(s). 
/ :sarcasm:
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
15
Points
430
mariomike said:
Not all of them apparently. Our former mayor's conduct was "questionable". He's still on the City payroll as a councillor.
...

Ahhh, but they are elected officials.  There's ways to remove elected officials from the office to which they've been elected, but that's up to the constituents to begin rolling that particular ball.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
ArmyVern said:
Ahhh, but they are elected officials.  There's ways to remove elected officials from the office to which they've been elected, but that's up to the constituents to begin rolling that particular ball.

Yes.

That fact was pointed out during a dismissal arbitration for off-duty "Conduct unbecoming a practicing Paramedic":
"As observed by City counsel, the Mayor and members of Council are not employees of the City and their conduct, whatever that may or may not include, is not before me."
 

opcougar

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This guy is obviously NOT going to get his job back, and nobody is going to be offering him one anytime soon. However, Lawyers should be able to secure him a substantial golden handshake, with them taking a % of course.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
opcougar said:
This guy is obviously NOT going to get his job back, and nobody is going to be offering him one anytime soon. However, Lawyers should be able to secure him a substantial golden handshake, with them taking a % of course.

I'm not an employment lawyer, but my understanding ( based on what they said in this story )
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/05/13/does-hydro-one-have-the-right-to-fire-tfc-fan-shawn-simoes.html

is in the case of a unionized employee, there needs to be "just cause" for dismissal. If there is, you get nothing.

If there is not "just cause", terminated employees are entitled to Severance Pay.

There is a calculator for non-unionized employees:
http://www.severancepaycalculator.com/?gclid=Cj0KEQjw1pWrBRDuv-rhstiX6KwBEiQA5V9ZoQK8T5qnaGept5S_MkUs6gg32y4_cG6FupkJpwDcMs8aAvCt8P8HAQ

From the story, it is unknown if there is a union involved in this case.



 

opcougar

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hydro one is yet to provide a "just cause" reason for firing this jerk (yes I am calling him that), and instead to based their decision on social media justice.

Whatever the outcome, it's Hydro customers that will suffer the most from hiked monthly bills.

mariomike said:
I'm not an employment lawyer, but my understanding ( based on what I have read )
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/05/13/does-hydro-one-have-the-right-to-fire-tfc-fan-shawn-simoes.html

is in the case of a unionized employee, there needs to be "just cause" for dismissal. If there is, you get nothing.

If there is not "just cause", terminated employees are entitled to Severance Pay.

There is a calculator for non-unionized employees:
http://www.severancepaycalculator.com/?gclid=Cj0KEQjw1pWrBRDuv-rhstiX6KwBEiQA5V9ZoQK8T5qnaGept5S_MkUs6gg32y4_cG6FupkJpwDcMs8aAvCt8P8HAQ

From the story, it is unknown if there is a union involved in this case.
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
opcougar said:
Hydro one is yet to provide a "just cause" reason for firing this jerk (yes I am calling him that), and instead to based their decision on social media justice.

I have no idea where you have been hiding, but they did state the reason that they "were firing this jerk".


opcougar said:
Whatever the outcome, it's Hydro customers that will suffer the most from hiked monthly bills.

???

How in the world did you deduce that?
 
Top