He was attached to Ubi’s office Montreal, QC, Canada.
If there isn’t anything more than what is mentioned in the article, it’s highly that the CDPDJ would rule against Ubi if the dismissal is challenged; this would likely be protected as Freedom of Expression, as nothing negative was said about Ubi besides the implication that Ubi thought that their employees wouldn’t see their motives.
Curious: Does Montreal allow “employment at will” like most states in the US do? If it does, I can’t imagine an UbiSoft contract not including it. The article definitely makes it sound like a termination for cause, but what’s written on his termination paperwork may be entirely different.
QC has stronger protections than neighboring ON does, actually. If the employee has more than 2 years of service they simply cannot be dismissed without just cause. Even under 2 years there are a bunch of protections, but at 2+ it gets harder.
He was attached to Ubi’s office Montreal, QC, Canada.
If there isn’t anything more than what is mentioned in the article, it’s highly that the CDPDJ would rule against Ubi if the dismissal is challenged; this would likely be protected as Freedom of Expression, as nothing negative was said about Ubi besides the implication that Ubi thought that their employees wouldn’t see their motives.
Curious: Does Montreal allow “employment at will” like most states in the US do? If it does, I can’t imagine an UbiSoft contract not including it. The article definitely makes it sound like a termination for cause, but what’s written on his termination paperwork may be entirely different.
QC has stronger protections than neighboring ON does, actually. If the employee has more than 2 years of service they simply cannot be dismissed without just cause. Even under 2 years there are a bunch of protections, but at 2+ it gets harder.