Archive for February, 2009

Love and Marriage? An Employment Law Refresher

This workshop is designed to give participants the tools they need to advise on the hot button employment law issues that they may face through all stages of the employment relationship, given the new developments in the areas of privacy and human rights and damages for wrongful dismissal. This workshop will benefit corporate counsel as well as any practitioner who deals with employment law issues from time to time.

Co-Chairs
Sean M. Kennedy, Senior Regional Counsel, Legal Affairs, Central & Western Regions, Canada Post Corporation
Terrie-Lynne Devonish, Chief Counsel, Aon Canada Inc.
Full Program Agenda
Introductory Remarks 9:00 am

The Courtship: Key Issues Arising in the Pre-hiring Process 9:05 am
• Alcohol and Drug Testing
• Discussion regarding courts and arbitrators in Canada who have generally struck down both
pre and post-employment drug testing in the absence of reasonable grounds
• To what extent and under what circumstances can an employer conduct alcohol and drug tests on prospective and current employees in light of new court decisions permitting drug testing?
• Reference checks
• To what extent can a current or former employer express dissatisfaction when asked to provide a reference for an employee?
Frances L. Fitzgerald, Senior Legal Counsel, Scotiabank Employment Law Group
Darryl R. Hiscocks, McMillan LLP
Arleen V. Huggins, Koskie Minsky LLP

The Marriage: What’s Mine is Yours? 9:45 am
The issue of employee privacy and the scope of an employer’s right to access employee information:
• What is the extent of privacy to which an employee is entitled at the workplace?
• Does the employer have a right to review and seize employee computer data?
• Does an employer have a right to the medical information that forms the basis of an employee’s application for sick leave or disability benefits?
Sean M. Kennedy, Senior Regional Counsel, Canada Post Corporation
Janice P. Rubin, Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Richard J. Charney, Ogilvy Renault LLP

Break 10:45 am

The Divorce: New Developments in Employee Terminations 11:00 am
The evolution of jurisprudence in wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal:
• The evolution of Wallace v United Grain Growers and its often novel uses in claims for punitive damages
• The recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Evans v Teamsters and its impact on working notice in the context of constructive dismissal
• The Supreme Court of Canada decision in Keays v Honda
• Tips on “preventative lawyering” to avoid pitfalls leading to wrongful dismissal claims and human rights complaints
Jill C. Schatz, General Counsel, Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc.
Jeffrey Goodman, Heenan Blaikie LLP
Matthew L.O. Certosimo, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Lunch 12:15 pm




Brief STINT on Bay St.

STINT

During reading week, Omar Ha-Redeye participated in UWO’s STudent INTership (STINT) program.

He shadowed a Bay St. lawyer in the area of labour/employment law.




Weekly Law School Roundup #158

Evan Schaeffer of the Legal Underground in St. Louis gives a shout-out in The Weekly Law School Roundup #158,

As a law professor asks whether law-student weblogs are dying, here’s your weekly list of good posts from the past week by law students, some current or almost current, some recently-graduated–

Networks How law students can meet lawyers. [Law Is Cool]




The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning – Reason, Scripture, and War

detail of leaf from codex amiatanus
The January 2009 issue of the Journal of Scriptural Reasoning, an online publication out of the University of Virginia, is out.
This issue features a discussion from religious scholars on verses 4:11 and 8:1,41 of the Qur’an, which deals specifically with a specific form of jihad of warfare:
And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the Cause of Allâh, and for those weak, ill­treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help.” (An-Nisa 4:75)
They ask you (O Muhammad SAW) about the spoils of war. Say: “The spoils are for Allâh and the Messenger.” So fear Allâh and adjust all matters of difference among you, and obey Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW), if you are believers. (Al-Anfal 8:1)
And know that whatever of war-booty that you may gain, verily one-fifth (1/5th) of it is assigned to Allâh, and to the Messenger, and to the near relatives [of the Messenger (Muhammad SAW)], (and also) the orphans, Al-Masâkin (the poor) and the wayfarer, if you have believed in Allâh and in that which We sent down to Our slave (Muhammad SAW) on the Day of criterion (between right and wrong), the Day when the two forces met (the battle of Badr) – And Allâh is Able to do all things. (Al-Anfal 8:41)
The introductory conversation is between John Kelsay of Florida State University, Rumee Ahmed of Colgate University, and Martin Kavka of Florida State University.
Brantley Craig and Jacob Goodson then describe what follows,
The “Reflective Responses” come from Omar Ha-Redeye, Randi Rashkover, and Peter Dula – all of whom were in the same group at a three-day Scriptural Reasoning Education training session at the University of Virginia this past summer. We invited these three contributors to respond because of their familiarity and participation in scriptural reasoning, and because none of them were a part of the AAR panel discussion on war. Therefore, we asked them to provide reflections specifically on the role of reason and scripture within this conversation on war rather than on “war” itself. Ha-Redeye offers a broader understanding of the role of Qur’anic interpretation for thinking about war and also a brief discussion on the practice of scriptural reasoning within Muslim ways of reading and reasoning. Rashkover provides a very thorough response to the ins-and-outs of this conversation and brings in other passages as a way to talk to and with Kavka’s article. Dula makes explicit the difference the method of scriptural reasoning makes for both reading scripture and thinking about questions concerning war. What he finds interesting in the conversation is more the ways that Ahmed and Kelsay read these scriptural passages, and less any attempt to construct some kind of clear and distinct scriptural “theory” for just war.
Jacob Goodson of the University of Virginia and Stanley Hauerwas of Duke Divinity School also provide a post-script conclusion.




    Sample of Working & Published Papers

    Recent and Upcoming Publications & Presentations

  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye


  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye
  • Omar Ha-Redeye

  • Omar Ha-Redeye