[Ronindan]

Life goes on. The only thing 'delusional' in this scenario are these misguided employees who prefer to grind an axe with their former boss even when they still have jobs. Some people just don't know how to quit when they're ahead.

Like I said previously...go ask the thousands upon thousands of BlackBerry employees who have already been let go and tell me this comparative handful that got 'swindled' into new jobs are any worse off? LMFAO

By the Canadian HR legislation - those former BB employees that RIM transferred to Ford is still entitled to a severance package from BB, since those very same employees did not resign from BB. But rather they were laid off by BB as it was they that changed their former employee status.

[spantch101]

This is a bad move by blackberry. Since BB transferred them to Ford -- BB is still responsible for giving each employee a severance package, since BB let them go. BB cannot claim by Canadian Employment law that the employees that they transferred to Ford, resigned since it is BB that initiated the change.

The key here is, not to assume you know anything, cause you probably don't. And we don't know the whole story yet

Posted Via Passport with CB10 app

[Ronindan]

The key here is, not to assume you know anything, cause you probably don't. And we don't know the whole story yet

Posted Via Passport with CB10 app

Canadian law is simple - unless BB can prove that these employees suing them actually resigned (submitted notice) from their jobs. Then BB is in the hook for providing them an appropriate severance package since BB initiated the transfer of those employees to Ford. The only way BB is not responsible is if the actual employees applied to Ford on their own and resigned from BB - then BB is not responsible for providing them a severance package.

[stlabrat]

there are big difference of labour law between US and Canadian... I think BB over looked or under estimated the difference. I amsomewhat surprise that legal didn't careful about this... after they laid off so many BBers, they should be very experienced with Canadian Labour law... something fishy here...Can't wait for the real story come out (don't tell me they ask Legal intern to handle the stuff, or some fresh MBA HR).

[blackberrybrad]

By the Canadian HR legislation - those former BB employees that RIM transferred to Ford is still entitled to a severance package from BB, since those very same employees did not resign from BB. But rather they were laid off by BB as it was they that changed their former employee status.

There is no such thing as Canadian HR legislation. Employment laws are typically under provincial jurisdiction. Not sure where all these employees were located. Most likely in Ontario which would fall under ESA if I remember correctly.

Posted via CB10

[blackberrybrad]

Canadian law is simple - unless BB can prove that these employees suing them actually resigned (submitted notice) from their jobs. Then BB is in the hook for providing them an appropriate severance package since BB initiated the transfer of those employees to Ford. The only way BB is not responsible is if the actual employees applied to Ford on their own and resigned from BB - then BB is not responsible for providing them a severance package.

Canadian Law is not simple, and again employment law is typically regulated on a provincial level.

Posted via CB10

[Ronindan]

There is no such thing as Canadian HR legislation. Employment laws are typically under provincial jurisdiction. Not sure where all these employees were located. Most likely in Ontario which would fall under ESA if I remember correctly.

Posted via CB10

I mistakenly labeled it - the correct title is the Canadian Labour Code (Canada Labour Code). Each province have their slight interpretation & implementation of it (e.i. Quebec's minimum wage is at $10.55, while it is $11.40 in Ontario) but all provincial employment laws adhere to the Canadian Labour Code as it set the legal precedence for all Canadians.

[Ronindan]

Canadian Law is not simple, and again employment law is typically regulated on a provincial level.

Posted via CB10

Actually it is. The implementation of it can be complicated and but for this case - the onus is on BB to prove that the employees they transferred actually resigned from their jobs. (https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ca...ermination.pdf).
But that is very hard for BB to pull that off, since they are the ones that initiated the "transfer".

One thing to note: even though attached PDF is mainly used by public sector employees - it also used in courts for employees in private business as a precedence.

[Ronindan]

there are big difference of labour law between US and Canadian... I think BB over looked or under estimated the difference. I amsomewhat surprise that legal didn't careful about this... after they laid off so many BBers, they should be very experienced with Canadian Labour law... something fishy here...Can't wait for the real story come out (don't tell me they ask Legal intern to handle the stuff, or some fresh MBA HR).

Labour laws in Canada is more favorable to employees and not to employers. I am assuming that these transfers happended becasue of the partherhips between BB and Ford (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...p-car-software) which does not help BB's case.

It really comes down to is how BB presented the transfer to their employees. If BB was not clear to their employees that their employment was being terminated or worse pressure the employees to sign/accept the transfer to Ford, then BB is in trouble.

[itsnotaboutart]

You really think these people were given nice cushy jobs and are just trying to get money out of BlackBerry?

Keep in mind, all that is needed to start a class action is a lawyer and one member of the proposed class. The filing of the Statement of Claim is not evidence that the people who the proposed plaintiff purports to represent agree with his or her position.

[donnation]

Keep in mind, all that is needed to start a class action is a lawyer and one member of the proposed class. The filing of the Statement of Claim is not evidence that the people who the proposed plaintiff purports to represent agree with his or her position.

Understood, but someone earlier claiming that these people were given cushy jobs and were gold diggers is a little ridiculous without knowing the full facts of the story.

[slagman5]

Depends....

Do they have to commute or relocate?
Pay the same?
Work the same?
Benefits the same?

Some might have preferred to be fired, get the benefits and then go find a job that they wanted.

In the end... this will "cost" BlackBerry much more than if they had made it an optional thing. But Chen can't afford the details of this being played out in the courts. What department didn't need 300 people anymore? BB10 Development? Android Development? QNX Development? That they found them a home at Ford would seem to lean towards them being QNX.... But I guess it's possible these were all hardware people that someone fit into Ford Canada....

But did they agree to the transfer or were they forced to? Because the wording kind of suggested that they agreed to it. So those factors you named, should have been agreeable for them to have taken the deal. If so, the I don't think they should be able to "double dip." But if they were forced to the transfer, then yes, definitely will be a case...

Posted without the aid of AutoCorrect with my physical keyboard via CB10

[slagman5]

Labour laws in Canada is more favorable to employees and not to employers. I am assuming that these transfers happended becasue of the partherhips between BB and Ford (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...p-car-software) which does not help BB's case.

It really comes down to is how BB presented the transfer to their employees. If BB was not clear to their employees that their employment was being terminated or worse pressure the employees to sign/accept the transfer to Ford, then BB is in trouble.

Exactly, if the employees agreed to the terms of the transfer, then they have no case. If they were forced to transfer, then they do have a case.

Posted without the aid of AutoCorrect with my physical keyboard via CB10

[TGR1]

That comes out to about $60,000 each. I'm sure BB will settle out of court.

Far less. Lawyers get substantial cut first.

[qwerty4ever]

I know 5 ex-BlackBerry employees who have been let go in one way or another at various points in time. I made a point of speaking to a couple of them over the last few days since this hit the press and the two I've been able to reach both said they were treated far better by BB than they expected. Both received hefty severances and offers of retraining, job search tools, etc. One was let go last year (I think around May?) and the other the year before. The other 3 I haven't been able to reach.

I'm not sure this proves anything but it just reminds me that there are two sides to every story and if BB does take this all the way to court it should make for some entertaining threads here!

As a former employee of the company my severance package was considerably more generous than the legal requirements. Getting laid-off is not enjoyable but I cannot complain about the way BlackBerry handled letting each affected employee go.

[anon(10101748)]

Not sure about Canada and will leave my opinion out as it has zero impact. In the US this what we call UNETHICAL. Not definitely illegal but let's get all facts first. Here's some initial legal thoughts.

Now from an employment termination perspective, it's "seems" BlackBerry may have used a legal loophole.

The problem is an article versus legal document. I haven't seen legal documents. That said, if BlackBerry says, "Hey Joe you know we are letting people go, but we've found you another job with Ford. One condition, you forfeit your rights to severance, pension, etc". There is nothing illegal there. Joe can say, no thanks, fire me. If Joe accepts and signs, that's his choice....BUT...

*The lawyer will need to prove in court that BlackBerry knew that Ford would immediately fire these employees. This isn't criminal it's civil at least if it was US. Again, not sure about Canada. Moreover, if proven that collusion existed and Ford and BlackBerry both were connected and behind this, then Ford should be named in the Law Suit as well as an accomplice for conspiring against these employees.

It's an entirely way more complicated case than a couple paragraphs in the news.

Again, unethical.... absolutely. Illegal, depends.

Lastly...EMPLOYERS in the US win more than 90% of cases brought by EMPLOYEES. Some will simply millions to avoid a judgement against them or settling. Companies have spent $50 million to avoid paying $10 million. It just depends.

[Invictus0]

New update,

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/judge-ok...-pay-1.1265221