Tim Horton's blow back.

[5.4MarkVIII]

Stepping up her words again Tim's franchise owners again yesterday. Nice how she goes on n on about other small business's have taken it in stride with no complaints, guess they can't afford to defend themselves against our elected govt'd and their bottomless / our pocket book.

I think that was her plan. I know quite a few small business that are tricked and don’t know what to do. Don’t cut costs. And where does the money come from.
Cut cost and risk the backlash that Tim’s is seeing. Tim’s will survive. Smaller business would not.

[Ponyryd]

^Screw the risk, many businesses are not sustainable with the new wages unless you raise your prices substantially. Business owners need to come together and all raise prices/slash benefits so Tim’s doesn’t look like the bad guy-Wynne does.

The big unions appear to be pushing this back to the forefront otherwise it would fade away. These guys are behind the protests which are being hosted by some of the big unions in various locations. The organization is pretty murky in terms of who created it but all the big unions have sections/media on their own websites about it (ie. 15and fairness).

http://www.15andfairness.org/nationa...on_tim_hortons

This is so stupid. I really wish I could go to all the stores they’re protesting at, put on a Wynne mask and drink a Tim’s coffee in front of them.

[Armen]

What station?

Sorry... Shell and this should have been in the gas prices thread, lol. Wrong clicky.

[5.4MarkVIII]

^Screw the risk, many businesses are not sustainable with the new wages unless you raise your prices substantially. Business owners need to come together and all raise prices/slash benefits so Tim’s doesn’t look like the bad guy-Wynne does.
.

I don’t disagree.

I only had one employee that was making less than 15. That employee wasn’t worth more and has cost me thousand upon thousand in sales. Over the last couple years.

She no longer works for us. And we gave more hours to another employee that was pet time to avoid having to hire someone else.

I’m already hearing about how it’s minimum is going to be 15 and hour and how my current employees who make 15 expect a raise. Won’t do all the extra work they do if they are only making minimum.


I can’t raid my prices becasie they are set by the manufacture. And my direct competition big box stores. They aren’t raising prices. They are reducing staff and putting in more self checkouts.

[Ponyryd]

^Tough situation, and I empathize, I would definitely not want to own a business at this point.

I’m faced with this as well although on a different level-contract negotiations. I’m sure everyone in my bargaining unit will want a raise (me included), and that’s not gonna go over well with the owners.

[bluetoy]

I don't drink coffee or eat doughnuts but I think I am going to go to Tim Hortons to get a coffee to show my support in their fight against the lie-beral dictatorship.

[Mellow Yellow]

This probably isn't practical for you but I suspect will happen elsewhere

if an employee was making $15/hr prior to the new Wynne tax and now expects a 20% raise similar to the bottom end workers, that employee get's fired and replaced with a new worker at $15/hr

this assumes common capability and interchangeability of people, and has zero empathy for the effect of fired workers

I honestly think that strategy would backfire. I'm sure the employees could get together and initiate a law suit for wrongful dismissal.
Why did you let them go when they did nothing wrong. You need a written history of any indiscretions with remedial action and signed by the employee and with continued indiscretions if you want to let them go and hire someone else even if its not at a lower wages.

[92redragtop]

I honestly think that strategy would backfire. I'm sure the employees could get together and initiate a law suit for wrongful dismissal.
Why did you let them go when they did nothing wrong. You need a written history of any indiscretions with remedial action and signed by the employee and with continued indiscretions if you want to let them go and hire someone else even if its not at a lower wages.

I don't think you don't need a reason if you give proper notice and severance (if eligible). Most companies that know what they're doing will give a little extra which makes it almost impossible for a court to rule against the company (any decent labour lawyer would advise a prospective claimant of this).

[Mellow Yellow]

I don't think you don't need a reason if you give proper notice and severance (if eligible). Most companies that know what they're doing will give a little extra which makes it almost impossible for a court to rule against the company (any decent labour lawyer would advise a prospective claimant of this).

And what are you going to put on the record of employment?

Fired - what reason - also former employee cannot collect unemployment insurance when fired for cause or when they quit.

Lack of work - but you hired someone else

There are many cases that have gone to court. To protect themselves employers have hired labour lawyers.....have you ever seen how large those bills are? Might as well retain the worker and pay the extra.

[92redragtop]

And what are you going to put on the record of employment?

Fired - what reason - also former employee cannot collect unemployment insurance when fired for cause or when they quit.

Lack of work - but you hired someone else

There are many cases that have gone to court. To protect themselves employers have hired labour lawyers.....have you ever seen how large those bills are? Might as well retain the worker and pay the extra.

You can separate employment "without cause" as long as you compensate appropriately - you don't need a reason related to performance. One company I've worked at was regularly hit with Ontario Human Rights Board complaints and lawsuits about firings but they always compensated higher than the law recommended so the cases never went anywhere. My manager (CEO of a TSX listed company) once asked me to let someone go because he didn't like how she looked. I've had to do "with cause", "without cause", downsizing layoffs, etc., so have worked closely with HR and lawyers on these aspects over the years. The companies that get in trouble tend to pay inadequately or at the minimum the law requires which opens the door for legal interpretation and maneuvering about age, gender, level in company, industry specialization, etc.