Newsletters

204

How can you tell senior managerial personnel?

Under the Labour Standards Act [Act], an employee who believes that he has been dismissed without a good and sufficient cause may, under certain conditions, file a complaint that could allow him to receive substantial compensation or even cause his reinstatement. However, “senior managerial personnel” are excluded from this regime.

The question is then, how can you tell senior managerial personnel?

In a recent decision (Delgadillo c. Blinds To Go Inc., 2017 QCCA 818), the Court of Appeal of Quebec affirmed a decision to deny a claim for unjust dismissal by ruling that the complainant was a senior manager under s 3, para 6 of the Act.

Criteria on which the Court relied include:

  • the employee took part in the elaboration of the company’s strategies and policies;
  • he was in direct contact with the company’s owners and could discuss these strategies and policies with them or make suggestions without having to go through a go-between;
  • he was the highest-ranking person in the business, immediately below the president and the vice-chairman;
  • he performed key tasks in the business and enjoyed considerable leeway in his job;
  • he was one of the highest paid employees.

Despite the fact that the employee did not have general authority on the business and was in charge of only one of the company’s plants, he was still a senior manager.

The concept of senior managerial personnel is intrinsically restrictive: one should not interpret the definition so narrowly that the exclusion would apply only to the sole top manager in the business.

By Jacques Bélanger, from our Labour and Employment Law Group.

204

Articles in the same category

So? Is it settled or not?

In an interim decision in Djaferian v. Spanoudakis,rendered on February 20, 2026, the Superior Court had to determine whether an offer made 15 months earlier, prior to the institution of proceedings, could still be accepted and result in a transaction. Summary of Facts and Timeline The Plaintiff, a co-owner who sustained water damage to his private […]

Office Parties and the Employer’s Duty to Prevent Harassment

In De Sousa and Corporation interactive Eidos, 2026 QCTAT 4, the Quebec Administrative Labour Tribunal (ALT) appears to have broadened the scope of an employer’s obligation to prevent harassment. The decision arose from a complaint filed by a former employee who had been sexually assaulted at her home by a colleague following an office party organized by the […]

Should Economic Losses Be Considered Property Damage?

The Quebec Court of Appeal in Zurich, Compagnie d’assurances SA c. CRT Construction inc., recently overturned the Superior Court’s decision on the interpretation of a construction insurance policy. Facts CRT Construction Inc. (“CRT”) was retained by the City of Montreal (“City”) to perform major construction work at the Atwater water treatment plant. At the City’s request, CRT […]

The Court of Appeal delves deep into the parties’ intentions and claimant hits a wall…

The Facts In the context of a project for the construction of a ten-storey condo building, the excavation contractor subcontracts the design and installation of a Berlin-type retaining wall (the “Wall”) to Phénix Maritime inc. (“Phénix”) which, in turn, subcontracts the design to Les Investigations Marcel Leblanc inc. (“IML”). Problems arise that substantially delay the […]

New CAI Guidance on Preventing Confidentiality Incidents: A Practical Roadmap for Businesses in Quebec

On January 30, 2026, Quebec’s privacy regulator, the Commission d’accès à l’information (“CAI”), published fresh guidance aimed at strengthening how organizations prevent confidentiality incidents involving personal information. Confidentiality incidents are one of the most significant privacy risks facing organizations today. In Quebec, these incidents are governed by several laws, including the Act respecting the protection […]

Not-So-Latent Defects for a Poorly Equipped Tradesman

In Beaudoin v. Boucher, 2025 QCCA 1646, rendered last December 19, the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of an action in latent defects brought by the buyers of a residential property. The Court reiterated the buyer’s duty to pursue further inspections when confronted with serious indicia of defects, particularly where they possess recognized expertise […]