First published on Thursday, January 22, 2026
Last updated on Thursday, January 22, 2026
Welcome to HR Heartbeat, where we take a look at the week’s most pressing HR and employment law stories. With over a decade of experience working within the HR and employment law industry, I give my opinion on current trends impacting your business, as well as my own personal commentary on all things HR and legal.
Contracts, controversy, and a little NDA reality check
A recent case in Vancouver raises an interesting question: is it ever okay for employees to breach a contract “in goodwill”?
The Vancouver Symphony Orchestra (VSO) decided to largely stop using non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) after facing backlash over a sexual misconduct case. Their NDA was meant to protect both employees and the organization from unproven allegations, but controversy erupted when a violinist spoke out and the VSO issued a cease-and-desist letter.
There’s an important HR lesson here: documentation matters, but how it’s used matters even more. NDAs and settlement agreements are legally binding, and violating them can carry serious consequences. At the same time, new legislation in Canada is challenging the blanket use of NDAs, especially in harassment or discrimination cases.
Some provinces, like PEI, now limit NDA use unless the employee explicitly requests confidentiality, while Ontario and Nova Scotia are considering similar protections.
For employers and HR teams, the takeaway is clear: keep thorough records, ensure employees understand what they’re signing, document negotiations, and seek professional advice.
You’ve got mail! Or do you?
A rural mail carrier has been reinstated after being fired for leaving thousands of undelivered pieces of mail in his vehicle.
The arbitrator ruled that the termination was excessive—he had a clean record over eight years and documented mental health challenges, including PTSD and an adjustment disorder.
Yes, storing undelivered mail was a serious violation of his duties. The employer argued that trust was broken, especially since delayed mail affected sensitive items like cheques, health cards, and immigration documents.
But the arbitrator emphasized that documented evidence of an employee’s health and work history can weigh heavily even when the misconduct is serious.
It’s important to remember, documentation and progressive discipline aren’t just “nice to have” they’re essential. Providing mental health accommodations and keeping thorough records helps ensure that disciplinary actions are fair, defensible, and protect both the employee and the organization.
Early birds don’t always get the worm
An interesting ruling from Spain has flipped an attendance issue to a side of the employment relationship we rarely see.
The court upheld an employer’s decision to dismiss a worker who kept arriving 30–45 minutes early. Despite two years of verbal and written warnings the employee just kept coming into work too early.
On the surface, this could be seen as enthusiasm, but it was treated as insubordination, proving that repeatedly refusing to follow lawful, reasonable instructions can justify termination.
What really stands out in this case is that documentation was a core part of the court’s ruling. The employer had documented progressive discipline—verbal warnings, written warnings, and a final notice—creating a clear paper trail showing the employee understood expectations and consequences.
This case is an apt reminder that proportionality matters. For a dismissal to stand, an employee’s behaviour has to genuinely impact the working relationship and clearly go against documented expectations. Clear policies, open communication, and good record-keeping help everyone stay on the same page.
And for management, apply policies consistently and document as you go. Strong records can be the difference between a decision that holds up and one that turns into an expensive dispute.
And that’s a wrap from me. Come back next time for my take on the latest headlines and employment law stories, helping keep your business ahead!
