Mordko

Sure but the scenario you described of letting go because someone said something and without HR makes me wonder. One can get a free consultation from an employment lawyer. Or even check a rough range of what the court might think.

https://toronto-employmentlawyer.com...xoCgKcQAvD_BwE

dbd33

I assume that, given the number of people our team has casually dumped over the past couple of years, some of them must have done that. I don't think anyone was paid anything like the quoted month/year or we'd be discouraged from throwing more people out pour encourager les autres. Maybe not though, maybe HR thinks that reasonable and the firm just pays it.

scrubbedexpat091

That Dublin one doesn't look too terrible for the price considering the ocean view, listed at 5 million euro which is according to google 7,296,465 CAD$

I don't know about you but I would say you get more bang for your buck in that Dublin ocean view home than similiar priced homes in Vancouver. I don't about you, but if I had $5 million Euro or $7 million CAD$ to spend, I would prefer the house in Dublin myself., as for that apartment in Dublin it is 4 bedroom, 3 bath, and 2,281sq feet approx, and is about $2.5 million CAD, doing a search for apartments of 4bed 3 bath in Vancouver there is very few of that size even listed, 8 listings total in that size range, lowest cost one is 1.7 million and granted its brande new and its only that low because its on the far SE side of Vancouver and so far from transit and not very desirable area. A comparable size unit in a desirable area closer to transit will run you closer to 5.5 million If your over 50 you have an additional option at 1.9 million.

7,288,000 still not ocean front.

7,200,000 in Vancouver Example # 1

7,490,000 is nicer, closer to the water but still not ocean front.


Now you say you own house an hour and 2 hours away, this is 1 hour away from Vancouver and the least expensive house currently listed and still over 1 million dollars.

This one is in Abbotsford which is located approx 60 to 90 minutes east of Vancouver, limited transit so commuting options are limited, still pushing 800,000

Now if you can find a job in Chilliwack that will give you the income to be able to buy a 600,000-700,000 priced house Chilliwack might be an option, however its not the most economically viable town, mostly low wage service jobs, and no viable way to commute to Vancouver except by car, which will in a fuel efficient car still run you some $300-$400 per month on top of parking costs in Vancouver, free parking is limited in Vancouver and well if you say work at a hospital, there is no such thing as free parking, even big box retailers often have no free parking, so add a couple hundred a month for parking, you might see why commuting from Chilliwack may not be economically viable.

Man if it were as easy as just moving 1 hour away and commuting for affordable housing there would be no housing crises but that isn't reality at all.

Now if you can work from home, some of the economically depressed towns are cheaper, but you probably going to need to be one of the fortunate people who can work from home. Quesnel about 8-9 hours north east of Vancouver but again you may have trouble finding a job locally, its an economically depressed region with a declining population, from 2001 to 2011 average of 0.15% decline per year, since 2011 its increased a bit to 0.25% decline per year, so long term it may not be a viable place to live.

70 Mile House, not much there from what I can tell, probably wont find a job locally. <<<<<<< this one you don't own land but lease the land from the government, it also does not have indoor bathroom so you have to use an outhouse.


So using that Quesnel house as an example, looking at indeed, looks like I could earn about $16.20/hr, so assuming full-time (which may not be doable since many are casual and part-time listings) that is 33,700 per year gross, deduct what disability will clawback for making too much, total income gross would be $48,700 total per year, net would be closer to $43,000 per year of actual what there is available to use.

Using mortgage calculator at TD with 5% down payment, maximum purchase price with average monthly expenses of $1,000 (I did it low end, probably not realistic for most people) would be $152,000 so even that house in Quesnel appears to be too expensive with a minimum down payment.

The amount of time it would take to save $8,000 on that income would vary, if you can live with parents rent free you could save it in a year, if your paying $20,000 a year in rent, and have other expneses it would obviously take longer than a year.

Moses2013

All these examples would be out of reach for us and I assure you that I don't have millions. The property taxes for that house in Vancouver would probably be realistic as mortgage payments for a home in a year for us. What I meant is that if the focus is solely on BC you will probably never find affordable housing, so maybe another province might be the only option including cheaper land plots that allow modular housing. I know Siouxie said some people are forced to stay in the province but those are extreme cases. The next larger city for us in Ireland is around 25km away and has a population of around 80.000 and even there houses would have been too expensive for us. Sure even a village with pavement would be exciting for us but it's sometimes the price you pay to be able to afford a home. Of course even here the prices have gone up and there is hardly any supply. In Spain it's a different story and wages are very low but it's still possible to buy a smaller plot of land (10 km from the sea/1 hour from Barcelona) for 20-30K.

scrubbedexpat091

We are one of those extreme cases, we rely on disability for part of our income, its provincial based so we leave BC we lose disability, some provinces have their own programs, but some barely have anything but its not as if you can transfer from one province to another, can take literally years in the new province to get through all the red tape and approved, assuming they even approve, move from one province to another and apply for assistance, the new province will do everything in their power to talk you into returning to the province in which you came.

Some careers are also more mobile than others, registered psychiatric nurses are limited to BC, Alberta, MB and SK, Ontario east as far as I know one needs to be an RN which RPN out west are not, totally different education.

Now maybe if I could access mental healthcare and get training for a job that pays better, than maybe I could support 2 adults without needing disability, but as it stands now if we moved to New Brunswick or Newfoundland (Nova Scotia seems to have gotten expensive) we would lose so much support we get in BC and I could never earn enough to support 2 adults.

I'd be happy in a social housing town house in our complex, little yards, and double the space of our apartment, but need a kid to get those units.....but they are nice and a perfect in between solution of apartment and house.

Almost Canadian

I have been an employment lawyer in Canada, albeit in Alberta and, after looking at the laws in Ontario, I still believe that is not that expensive for an employer to fire an employee. I accept that some may have the benefits of a collective agreement, or individual contract, that may make it more expensive but, typically, governments don't fire their employees.

Mordko

I can comment on costs for a company with a large payroll to make our staff redundant in Ontario because the cost was carried by my cost centre. Not government, no collective agreement, not for cause. The Toronto lawyer’s link I provided is accurate in my experience although it only covers partial costs. The company also has to carry additional payments to the province. The costs will be different for companies with small payrolls and in other jurisdictions including Alberta where we also have staff who had to be let go.

Siouxie

The number of employees, the length of employment and the global income has an impact... as does the reason for termination and the number of employees affected -i.e dismissal without cause for 1 person versus mass redundacy but this doesn't apply to the majority of people!

https://www.ontario.ca/document/your.../severance-pay

Almost Canadian

I am confident that you will accept the posters above were talking about firings, rather than redundancies, which are very different.

Mordko

“Firings” as in “termination for cause”? I don’t think any of the examples above fall into that category. Redundancies and terminations without cause are both expensive.

dbd33

The aging technician was dismissed for cause. The cause being "not wanting to learn technology x". I suppose people could argue in court that they should have been made redundant but I haven't heard of that.

Almost Canadian

No. Firings as in, "...your services are no longer required..." As you are likely aware, terminations for cause don't require any form of payments to the one dismissed.

Being made redundant suggests the employee did nothing wrong (i.e., Air Canada's fleet is grounded and so the pilot's are made redundant. It is not the company's fault, nor is it the employees') and the caselaw that assists those employees takes that into account. Of course, many that are fired allege that they have done little wrong too.

In any event, you believe that it is expensive to terminate employees in Canada and I don't believe that that is the case, particularly when compared to how similar employees are treated in Europe and the UK. But I suppose that that will be governed by one's definition of expensive. I accept that it may be more expensive than in the US but, as I have no knowledge of such matters, I will have to defer to your greater knowledge.

Mordko

Put it this, way, it is sufficiently expensive that a multinational company has to take it into account in decision-making in Ontario while it's not a meaningful factor for the same company when doing business in the US. In terms of terminations without cause, I am by no means an expert but know how much it costs us and it falls within the ranges suggested by Ontario employment lawyers as referenced above.

Siouxie

Letting ONE person go? No they are not.

A family friend was just 'let go' without cause from a Non-Unionised premises of a multi national company... they were told their work was excellent and they had done nothing wrong.. but they were being 'let go' as they "didn't fit in with future plans" was the reason given. They had worked there for around 2 years and got two weeks severance pay plus vacation pay to date - and nothing else. They took it to a very well known Employment Lawyer who said "the company can let you go if they don't like the colour of your shoes on that day, in a non-unionised situation and there is absolutely nothing to be gained in trying to take it any further" he also said this is being reported as happening a lot Canada wide presently.

What might apply in your situation isn't necessarily the same for every other.

dbd33

I don't understand where this gulf in perception comes from. It's always been my understanding that, in Ontario, "didn't like his tie" is sufficient cause for dismissal. The two weeks and 4% must be paid and that's it. I have checked today and, in three cases of people we terminated, that was the case. I didn't check any more but have no reason to think there was different treatment for the others. Still, there are lots of people who think there's a significant cost, I do hear that sometimes when I ask "why is this person still here? There are better workers available for less".