Newsletters

June 14, 2017

208

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.

208

Articles in the same category

Insurance Law

May 11, 2026

No Notice of Default, No Termination

In Pavage Wemindji Inc. v. Compagnie de Construction et de Développement crie ltée, the Quebec Superior Court emphasized that a valid notice of default (mise en demeure) is not just a formality—it’s a precondition to exercising remedies like contract termination in many cases under Quebec civil law. The Decision The plaintiff, Pavage Wemindji Inc. (“Wemindji”), […]
Insurance Law

May 6, 2026

Public Contracts: When Does a Penalty Clause Cross the Line?

Penalty clauses are a practical tool for owners: instead of having to prove actual losses when a contractor falls short, they can rely on a pre-agreed sum. For contractors, however, the stakes are equally significant — a lump-sum penalty can consume a substantial portion of the contract’s value. Still, the mechanism has its limits. Courts […]
Insurance Law / Newsletters

April 24, 2026

Not So Intelligent!

Since the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence tools, growing concerns have emerged regarding their use in judicial proceedings. Recent decisions have relied on section 342 of the Code of Civil Procedure to sanction parties who make improper use of such tools. More specifically, this provision has been invoked on several occasions to address the use or citation […]
Insurance Law / Newsletters

April 2, 2026

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 […]
Labour and Employment Law / Newsletters

April 1, 2026

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 […]
Insurance Law / Newsletters

March 24, 2026

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 […]