I was told the package for this round of layoffs are way less than 2020 VWO, they gave a max of 2 years back in 2020, that will not be offered this time, 3-12 months max. So don’t rush into signing anything right away.
9 replies (most recent on top)
Don't be daft. There's no such thing as setting legal precedent in severance offers. That's a misapplication. Being generous during one such situation does not lock you into it for the future.
However... all you can do is extrapolate from the history and no matter how you slice and dice it, the Enbridge packages have been really good. I mean, don't expect the moon if you've been there only a year or two...
But they'll probably be 20% less than the Voluntary offers. But they were bribing you to self-select, so that offer is off the table.
If it’s less just get an employment lawyer. They’ve already set precedent with past severance. The lawyer will have a field day with them
It depends where you are. Canada-wide the mandates are extremely low.
https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federal-labour-standards/termination.html#h2.3
Slightly higher in Alberta.
https://www.dlegal.ca/post/termination-pay-alberta/#:~:text=While%20termination%20pay%20is%20mandatory,negotiated%20terms%20that%20may%20exist.
These are the bare minimums needed to keep the employer from being inviolation of labour law. However... they could be challenged in court. Enridge's severance packages are NEVER that low. They are litigation-averse, and would rather be generous in severance than spend money and time fighting a bunch of battles in court. I don't know anybody that was advised by a lawyer to challenge their ENB offer of severance in the past. Each person that brought it to a labour law attorney got the same answer. "The offer is very acceptable".
Yes, the voluntary packages were sweeter. They said as much at the time, and it makes sense.
It's a Canadian/Provincial thing.
There are laws in both US and Canada, that may mandate the minimum.
"At will" employment in some US states are still "laws" - except that the employer can legally fire you at will.
To say that Enbridge cannot offer anything lower compared to previous offer for sure is kind of "over-confidence" or "over-simplification"
All it matters is Enbridge offers
a.) More than legally required - that is for sure, their internal Legal and HR departments are not 100% dump in layoffs
b.) Something comparable to what other companies in similar industry offers recently (e.g. TC Energy, Pembina Pipeline, etc.)
c.) For Canada, an offer that Enbridge can explain/defense that you can reasonably find a comparable job during the period covered by the severance period. For example, if the labor market suggests that you can find a comparable job in 3 months, Enbridge can safely offer you 4~5 months (to give them some legal buffers) without any issues.
Canadian employment law often emphasizes "reasonable notice" or payment in lieu of notice for termination, considering factors like tenure and position. In the U.S., employment is often at-will, and severance is not a legal requirement, but it's a common practice negotiated in employment contracts. Each jurisdiction has specific regulations, so details may vary by province in Canada and state in the U.S.
Im not the first commenter but I can say there is no law per se. But there is a precedent that’s been set and if the company doesn’t live up to it, any employment lawyer would have a field day with them.
To the first commenter, what are these employment laws you speak of that require a certain amount of severance? Is this a Canadian thing? I know of no such law in the U.S.
Don't believe that for a minute. Why would they give less for something that's not voluntary and open themselves up for legal issues? There are employments laws that they can't circumvent because they will lose.