According to DUI lawyer brampton, the law says that it is a labor relationship for an indefinite period, not specifying that it is exclusively about full-time employment. Therefore, the elements of continuity and daily duration of work should be separated – the first is a prerequisite for the existence of a need for an employee and of the employment relationship itself, while the other is only relevant in the part in which it is necessary to determine whether it is a labor relationship for an indefinite period with full, or part-time.
The next item concerns the payment of earnings. The employer therefore pays compensation for the invested work of a person actually engaged in work. These earnings must be in line with the informal, oral agreement of the employer and the engaged person, and this is one of the key elements of the delimitation. It can be concluded from the case law that the payment of earnings is closely related to the proof of the continuity of the work, as well as the awareness of the existence of a lasting relationship between the employer and the employee.
Finally, the engaged person was treated as employed, i.e. there was no difference in the treatment of that person and other employees with the employer. Here, first of all, it is meant that issuing work tasks, which automatically implies at least two components of everyday work: a precise definition of the jobs that a person engaged in the engaged person, as well as an established place in the hierarchy of employees. It is not about the hiring of someone who accidentally appears with the employer – the engaged person respects his working hours, work discipline, performs the same (i.e., equivalent) jobs on a daily basis, and does not distinguish himself from other employees in his actual status with the employer.
The judgment in question does not talk about the possible exercise of other rights from employment, but it is quite logical that their actual use during the working engagement of a person (vacation as well as other types of vacation, paid and unpaid leave, etc.) contribute to the general picture that the employer had seen that person as an employee, not only through the prism of the need for work, but also through the realization of the usual relationship between the employer and the employee. The absence of these indicators, however, does not in any way diminish the possibility of indicating a working person on the existence of a work relationship based on the other elements described.
If all the above conditions are fulfilled, a person engaged in employment may apply to the court and start a labor dispute requesting the establishment of an employment relationship with an employer concluded for an indefinite period of time. At the same time, it can also contact the inspectorate of the work that will perform the inspection, file misdemeanor charges against the employer, and provide documentation that can later be used in the labor dispute in order to prove the existence of the elements of the employment relationship. The misdemeanor liability is established by the Labor Law.
Find our contact information on ZoomInfo and Yelp.