Laid-off workers, company clash over ministry notice
Important services were denied, former employees of CTS Corp. say, because of a delayed notification
John Featherstone has perused online job boards every day since losing his job as a sheet metal and facilities manager at a Mississauga manufacturing plant about two years ago.
“I’m basically starting from square one again and I’m 63 years old,” he said.
He worked at CTS Corp. for 38 years after emigrating from England as a young man. “I worked there all my working life,” he said. The multinational corporation designs and builds sensors and electrical components for a range of sectors, including auto manufacturers such as Toyota.
The company was in court this week after Featherstone and 75 other laid-off workers launched a classaction lawsuit, claiming that a protracted delay in notifying the Ministry of Labour of the plant’s closing denied them crucial support services.
The judge presiding over an Ontario Superior Court in Brampton reserved his decision on Wednesday. A judgment is expected in the fall, said lawyer Stephen Moreau, who is representing the plaintiffs.
Lawyers for CTS said they would not speak with media as the case is ongoing. But the company’s factum dismisses the workers’ claim as a “technical breach” that had “no detrimental effect on the plaintiffs and does not entitle them to fresh notice.”
The complex case hinges on provincial legislation governing mass terminations and events that occurred on April 17, 2014, when CTS issued severance letters to 77 workers. The termination date was set for almost a year later on March 27, 2015, which was later delayed by three months to June 26.
The plaintiffs allege that CTS breached the Employment Standards Act (ESA) by neglecting to immediately inform the ministry of its plan to close.
The ministry did not receive notice until May 12, 2015, more than a year after workers were first informed, according to the workers’ factum.
The non-unionized plant closed its doors in late 2015 and relocated to Mexico. About 129 people lost their jobs.
The notice period is important because it kick-starts services employees need prior to their last days, said Dave Parker, co-ordinator at Steelworkers Job Action Centre.
Employment Ontario’s Second Career program, for example, can provide $28,000 to help people re-enter the workforce, according to the workers’ factum.
CTS hosted “outplacement sessions” for some employees in January 2015 to facilitate job transition — workshops included resumé building and interviewing tools, the defence factum said.
“(The company) has a civic and corporate responsibility to help their previous employees while they’re leaving them in the dust. Less than seven weeks’ notice? Give me a break,” Parker said.
Under the Employment Standards Act, when an employer gives notice, “that’s when the trigger is pulled, that’s when you notify the Ministry of Labour,” said Moreau, the plaintiffs’ lawyer.
As a result, the workers want the notice period and severance package deemed null and void, the “clock reset.”
Beyond this, new severance should be paid, according to the plaintiffs’ factum.
The workers argue that “notice period” means informing employees and the ministry at the same time, while the company argues the act sets out minimum notice — eight weeks, in this case.
The Ministry’s website says that eight weeks’ notice must be provided to employees who are part of mass terminations within a four-week period.
“CTS was 12 days late notifying the (Ministry of Labour) of the closure, not 13 months as the plaintiffs allege,” CTS’s lawyers say in its factum.
CTS’s lawyers say that workers are not entitled to fresh notice in their factum, arguing that the first day of the notice period started on May 1, 2015.
In their factum, the company concedes that it “was initially told the Form 1 would not be required due to an original plan to stagger separation dates. The late filing was simply a mistake.”