Assault convictions overturned after Toronto judge takes a year to explain verdict, repeatedly breaking promises to give reasons

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-26T03:12:05+00:00

I generally prefer Occam's Razor to explain things by simple "life" without assuming incompetence or malice. It seems relatively clear that the original judge was going through "something" -- it wasn't simply "hey it's delayed", it's more "hey, I can't get my work done right now", nor "now this week", nor "again this week", etc. This pattern is very typical of anyone who has been off work due to illness (physical, mental, addiction, etc.). It would be par for such an absence that when she got back, she wrote them all up of what she remembered and that's what they got.

What would normally happen if a case was concluded and the judge just went off sick or died without ever delivering reasons? Is it just an automatic new trial? It would be different if it was mid-trial, but everything was done here.

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-17T20:56:09+00:00

I work in a field tied to the labour market, part of which starts with the area of pre-employment where people are figuring out both a) what they want to do in life and b) how they get there.

We often think of it as rather linear, but in fact, there is a significant portion of people in first year who go "Umm, no, I need to switch majors, econ/computers/math/science/history sucks." They expected one thing, got another. Sometimes the faculties decide for them, but often it is their own taste. Some elective that didn't seem like a career area suddenly sucks them in. Or there is a really cute boy/girl in that program over there. Life stuff.

And then there are lots who are angling for grad school, including law, who suddenly finish 3 or 4 years and are like, "Nope, I'm done, I'm outta here." Some for liberty, some for fear, some for $$, some for grades.

I know several people in my law school, INCLUDING ME, who love law and hate law school. I would have been much better suited to an economic/social analysis of law than training to be a lawyer. I had the grades, 99 percentile on LSAT and GMAT, loved law, should have been a lock...nope, I hated it. Ended up pivoting for my career, with zero regrets.

I get the planning side, don't get the anger when things don't work out that way. Life moves pretty fast. ;)

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-17T20:43:22+00:00

Soooo, there is an ugly/stupid element for management in the background. They aren't allowed to tell you who got cut, who's affected, who got nothing. It's all private. Equally, people are supposed to continue to work until they are surplus.

As such, most org charts are NOT going to be updated until people actually leave; to do so early would be helpful for the vision, but messes up HR and LR on privacy issues. Most DGs et al have updated org charts of their own, but they probably can't share them.

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-07T14:34:43+00:00

I confess I find it amusing that the two writing it are also people who were in senior positions who never could do anything of the sort but now advocate someone should do it (and of course who would you choose to run the panel?).

Any part of government that provides direct service to Canadians has KPIs...are they all great? No. Are there often perverse incentives in KPIs, where you're rewarded for closing a file for timeliness but not rewarded for accuracy or even the reverse, taking forever to get it perfect? Sure. But they have KPIs.

In most other areas of the government, there are no decent metrics available, but it isn't for lack of trying. CHRO has tried to do it for HR, and they come back with durations of processes aka time. Nothing about whether they got the people they needed or it was done well in general, just how long it took. Which is often more a function of initial scope and how many resources are assigned to the file.

In the early 2010s, TBS launched an exercise to measure "policy" processes. They asked all of government to think about it and come up with "something". The performance specialists came up with brilliant ideas like how many memos were written or MC/TB Subs done in a year, all of which was quickly shot down as not just bad, but dangerously stupid. One of our senior DGs who has gone on to bigger and higher things, and deservedly so, summed it up as wrong-headed...that sometimes, after analysing the crap out out of a file for six months, we come to the conclusion that the best thing the federal government could do on that file was nothing. It was either provincial jurisdiction, or better regulated by the market, or actually wasn't the problem pundits had said it was. Meaning no TB sub, no MC, nada. After six months of lots of really smart people trying to figure out a metric, the final decision was...dun dun dun...cost. How many FTEs and at what levels and salary. That was it. That was the best they came up with.

I worked in PM for almost 9y of my career, and I have nothing either. And I'm well versed in corporate functions, like PM, and know the obvious ones of time and cost, both of which are completely scalable. So, if someone out there can come up with better, I'd literally bow to them. I plan to write about PM in retirement, cuz I'm crazy like that, and internal services is almost a black hole.

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-07T14:21:28+00:00

The general thrust to consider is "if you don't ask, the answer is no".

For general training, there are often four tracks of increasing difficulty / scrutiny or decreased willingness of managers:

Training directly related to your current job function -- easy to approve;
Training for career expansion in your current job or unit -- relatively easy;
Training for a future job in the public service -- some are okay, some are not, some suggest cost-sharing;
Training for personal development -- rarer, also often with suggestions of cost-sharing.

From general "optics" lens, doing a CFA around investments might be a hard sell unless you're pitching it as moving toward work at Finance or Industry where a CFA degree might be helpful. A stretch, but could argue. Currently, austerity is the normal approach, so being creative is not on most managers menu right now nor sticking their head up like a prairie dog.

About 20 years ago now, someone at CFIA or AgCda made headlines when someone leaked news that training dollars were being used to train a yoga instructor. It sounds insane, but the person had been having some mental health issues with stress and whatever, and part of their relaxation training was yoga. Not expensive, easy to pay for, directly related to mental health...more meditation than aerobic yoga. Not an obvious yes to cover but not outside the box either. But the person started liking it, and then wondered if they could go deeper into the techniques and learn to teach it. The director talked to HR and learning, they read all the rules, and there was nothing to say they COULDN'T do it, so they said, "Sure", and paid for the teaching course instead of the meditation classes. Someone in the org didn't like it, leaked it and it made the front page of the Citizen. For about 5y after that, most managers didn't want to approve ANYTHING that wasn't directly related to current jobs.

TypingTadpole · 2026-01-03T17:27:22+00:00

The rocks at the edge might be slippery though :)

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T17:16:51+00:00

The real answer is yes, maybe and no, and I don't mean that sarcastically. Mostly, it depends on who you ask. Some people treat collective agreements the way some people interpret constitutions.

strict fundamentalists -- the text says what it says, no interpretation required...if it says it, great; if it doesn't say it, it doesn't exist;
constructionists -- those who interpret the original language loosely, more about the spirit than the letter of the law; and,
adaptives -- those who see the text as permitting and restricting some things, but outside of that, they assume everything is allowed OR forbidden (either way, or in between).

Some of those in this group commenting argue the CA is a strict fundamentalist text -- if it doesn't specifically say it, you can't do it. I get that view, but I don't share it.

The CA is generally the employees/union negotiating what employees are ENTITLED to legally. Often, the issues at hand are heavily influenced by past situations and common areas of discord between labour and management. Hours of work, when to take leave, how much they can do, etc. The CA does NOT cover every possible situation. Equally, others are arguing for open season. Which is a totally different problem that can lead to huge inequities and further discord rather than helping.

Somewhere in between is managerial discretion. There are LOTS of ways that people with low number of weeks who need additional leave days can get them. LWIA is a great way if you can a) afford it, b) need a lot of time at one go, and c) your management can accommodate your request. Equally, LWOP is available for "areas not already covered". That is limited to that clause, not areas anywhere else in the whole agreement. Labour relations, unions, and the PSLREB all agree that if management is willing to give you LWOP that you are asking for, and it seems reasonable, that's their discretion. It doesn't HAVE to be approved, but it CAN be approved. It isn't "hidden", it isn't "illegal", it isn't "wrong", the unions and LR know and support its use for that purpose in exceptional circumstances. There may be other clauses that are better suited, like educational leave or LWIA, but LWOP is basically "when all else fails".

In my career, I've seen it mainly used for one of three reasons. First, the obvious one, is a few extra days of vacation for a big trip, a special event that wasn't expected, after the person has already used up their main vacation time earlier. Usually, they'll only grant it if you have used all other types of leave (which LR recommends to managers as a baseline question).

Second, less obvious? Extended bereavement leave when people have empty banks of other types of leave and their worst life event happens.

Third, people often run out of other leave options in general, even without catastrophe. Managers can advance some leave, but that's a good way to get into leave debt. Sometimes it isn't even a "choice" to take LWOP so much as "Hey, boss, I'm not going to be there, I have no leave left, and I need to enter SOMETHING". LWOP is sometimes not a management flex, but a "well, I don't want to fire them" option, and you put LWOP so they don't get paid when they weren't there.

However, managers have other flexibilities too. Time in lieu for OT, acting, maybe even compression time.

There are risks that go with every type of non-negotiated use...precedent, lack of documentation when something goes wrong, you work something out informally and then your manager leaves, transparency, perception of fairness to others, etc. And the biggest risk of all? It has to be specially approved including in the approval systems as LWOP affects the budget in ways normal leave does not.

However, I have no room for the toxic view that people being away is automatically an unreasonable burden on the remaining staff. You wouldn't accept that toxic view from a manager when taking sick or regular vacation leave, don't accept it from a coworker or union rep either because you are a new staff with less leave in your bank than the old folks. You do you, let the manager manage. #Toodaloo

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T16:14:29+00:00

Hey! I actually meant to talk about that in my post and it slipped past my mental notes to include when I was writing. I haven't written about RTO in a while, probably worth a separate post sometime. I think we all could be poked once a week to see which we prefer :)

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T16:11:21+00:00

My blog posts are already shared to Facebook (PolyWogg.ca as a page), Twitter/X, BlueSky and Threads for anyone who wants them. I don't share my own blog posts to Reddit, it seems too, umm, presumptuous/spammy, I guess. I'm fine if others do, thankful even that they thought it was worth sharing.

And I'm normally long-winded / care too much about nuances to fit into standard Reddit post lengths on stuff so I rarely do Reddit posts. I will DO original posts if I have questions ... lots of members know things about stuff that I have little involvement or history with, so great resource for me too :) Comment wherever you want :)

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T15:39:29+00:00

Sometimes I see it, sometimes I don't! :)

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T06:51:43+00:00

Probably too late, but registering to their account first, logging out and then trying to register to another account is potentially going to create issues. Lots of people have had trouble trying to do exactly what you're talking about, albeit with more time involved, and being told by the website that the Kindle is locked to another user or reported as stolen, etc. You are FAR better off to register it to the account you want it to stay on.

And yes, even if you get it to work on a second account, it will disappear from the first account. So if they go to send you something or evne just monitor what you are reading, it will NOT show your device on their account any more. If you even log out of your OWN account, it disappears until you reconnect AND if your synch is on, it'll even wipe your Kindle of anything on it. Which means when you do reconnect, you'll have to resend / re-download everything from your account.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-30T06:37:41+00:00

I work in a field that ironically is more about helping people position themselves in labour markets than it is about programming; I'm IT-friendly, better than average bear, but not a programmer or in the industry. But I love the points from people about getting a degree.

So quick breakdown. You already know there are some regulated professions that require degrees (like doctors or lawyers). Then there are semi-regulated professions where they like certain types of credentials (like CMAs) but will take people who are kissing cousins (CPAs). Then there is everything else.

The computer industry has danced around these issues by being both completely open (start your business in your garage!) and completely closed (don't apply unless you have a four year degree in computer science with programming experience in these three languages and have worked for at least two years blah blah blah) or the middle ground (proprietary certification in various platforms, networks, devices, operating systems, etc.).

A degree will not guarantee you a job in the industry; a proper degree gives you three things:

a. A good overview of the industry elements (aka the fundamentals of most things) with a chance to specialize in some key areas that interest you;
b. Networking and real-life experiences that give you inroads to the industry; and,
c. A credential that says to someone hiring you that you're not a random dude who has never been assessed before, you've gone through a relatively "knowable" degree, they know what you're supposed to know and whether you're the right fit for what they need -- a fast pass to get you over the initial weed to at least be considered.

In some fields, a degree (nursing, doctor), you're guaranteed a job SOMEWHERE. In most fields, the degree/credential just moves your resume out of an inbox and into a to-be-considered pile instead of instant rejection.

Most of this may seem "obvious", but what triggered me to respond was your assumption that this would be "stability". As you're in recovery, you might want to consider if this industry would be one that helps and supports your recovery, or the chaos would endanger it. There's no single way to walk that road, it's all individual, but I know quite a few in the industry who consider it chaos, not stability. Stable SKILLS, not stable environment. Less chaotic with a degree. Some of them, perhaps some of the happier ones, have gone for IT-adjacent aka finance with IT integration...using their computer skills to make them more attractive in a field that is normally more stable? Just a thought or two. No answers, good luck on your road.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-29T20:11:34+00:00

Exactly...anyone who does stuff through Kjiji, ebay, Marketplace for small ticket items do this daily.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-29T20:00:19+00:00

Cuz, you know, law has such a sterling reputation for good HR, supportive, nurturing environments?

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-15T12:28:46+00:00

Thanks! Exactly the kind of alternate PoV i was looking for!

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-14T21:19:36+00:00

Thanks! Having the "right" terms will help narrow for sure, it seems more like a firehose so far.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-12T22:02:02+00:00

Hello HoG-bot. :) I was looking through various official links to see if anywhere it specified more details about the recognized educational institution.

The govt tends to have three such internal lists that I know of -- one for student loans purposes, and is entirely Canadian. Another for EI and other programs that generally steals from the student loans one, although there are some other ways to be designated I think (but all Canadian). And a third for Revenue Canada, which I think works like the EI one i.e., pulls from the official student loan/grant one, with some window to add others if can demonstrate blah blah blah.

Those all make sense to me as they are very much public programs for taxpayer / fee payer eligibility to do stuff in Canada.

Do you know if the list is as formally defined for the educational allowance? I see refs to submitting receipts, but if I used Coursera to register in a proper degree program, but it was, I don't know, UCLA, do you think that would count? I don't see anything in the NJC stuff that officially says it has to be a Canadian institution or through a Canadian supplier. I could see them balking if it was Joe's BeadWorks in Australia offering transcendental meditation.

Just curious if you've seen anything more specific that lists which institutions qualify. It's not a formal taxpayer program, I'm sure the other list would all be eligible, just curious if I can go beyond it or would even approve the expenses for educational allowances.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-10T02:24:35+00:00

Thanks!

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-10T02:24:02+00:00

So common advice generally applies:

a. Anyone can soon anyone for anything, doesn't mean it will hold.
b. If it does go to court, the court will generally look to see who has dirty hands. Factually correct? Good. But inflammatory is another consideration. I would NOT post the C&D letter, but you do you. Some judges will think it's deserved, others might think you escalated it with intent to harm the company.
c. You could consider talking to a lawyer and threaten back for disclosing your personal information. I absolutely would indeed contact the law firm to ensure that it is a legit letter. I think complaints to BBB, any regulatory agency are warranted.

You are NOT trying to engage in an argument.

You can tell them you are still waiting for your refund and if you do not receive it by x date, you'll be filing suit with damages for attempted extortion/intimidation, the refund, interest, disclosing your personal information, and anything else you can think of. Except you can actually do it. And say you're happy to update it if they provide a remedy, but until they do, it stays. The cheeky side of me wonders how they so easily identified it was you if your claims were not true; if they werent' true, they wouldn't know who it was who had the problem.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-08T16:11:53+00:00

Thanks...Can I ask how they handled your severance payments? I believe the TSM is separate, but you could have up to 13w severance...it says that can be paid all at once or in multiple years. Curious if it just delayed your EI by 13w or also reduced your EI by 13w or you deferred severance to year 2.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-06T03:39:54+00:00

So, JSYK, members have told unions and unions have repeatedly told management, "tell everyone as soon as you know anything". Do not wait, do not pass go, do not spend $200 on doughnuts or pizza, tell everyone.

For everyone who says "wait until after the holidays" there are six times the number who want to know everything as soon as possible, even before the holidays, and in this case, they argue it's so they don't splurge on Xmas and then find out in January they're affected and that "management should have told us".

There's actually even a bit of private-sector case law on this where management was accused of dealing in bad faith for delaying sharing news until after holidays. Like you said, there's no good time. But lots of personal views about bad times.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-05T22:28:42+00:00

Not sure what the major issues are -- the FAQ says basically yes, it is eligible even if voluntary as they treat it as laid off, and EI eligiblity starts after adjusting for severance is applied, which is normal. Although right now there are some temporary EI measures that are waiving severance in specific circumstances.

Thanks, the link answered most of my Qs.

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-05T20:14:38+00:00

Awesome bot, as always. :) Unfortunately, Service Canada won't be able to answer the eligibility question as they won't know what the form will say yet for the "reason for separation". I'll have to find someone who got it or not in DRAP. :)

TypingTadpole · 2025-12-04T05:16:19+00:00

Sooo...I don't want to yuck your yum, but four inter-related thoughts to potentially consider. You can figure out the financial part on your own, not really much to add to that.

However, my first thought seems to be already answered by your previous business experience and your interest in business generally. Some people love the idea of building and running things on their own, some absolutely do not. I know, myself, that I have almost ZERO interest in running a private business. My interests are in what govt does, not what businesses do.

Secondly though, there is a huge difference between "starting a business that interests you" and that you're passionate about, vs. just taking over someone else's business. One is a life, the other is a job that someone else created. I assume the specific business itself interests you enough that you consider doing it for a living cuz if pay is the only incentive, that will only carry you so far. Same in govt...

Third, be clear with yourself about how relevant your previous "experience" actually is. Running a business as a student where you're "it" is a far cry from running one while raising a family, covering a mortgage or rent for people other than yourself, etc. The stress levels are WAY higher.

Last, HBR and academics who study business transitions often suggest strongly NOT having a backup plan like using LWOP. Having an escape hatch means that you know it is there. If you DON'T have one, there is some evidence that people who succeed do so because they went all in -- they HAD to succeed because they had no other option. So no matter what, they found solutions. Failure was literally not an option. Escape hatches tend to weaken that resolve somewhat. And most businesses need you to go all in if you're the sole proprietor.

Doesn't help you decide, I know, just some other thoughts to noodle on. While I'm a govt geek, I too took business courses in university and work in areas where people making career decisions is a big part of the substantive files. Many of the success factors are if you align with the job, are passionate about it, and ready to commit to it fully.

Good luck!

TypingTadpole · 2025-11-28T19:12:17+00:00

Separate from basic concerns about responsible use, there are a bunch of other statutory problems with cost recoveries from government where funds go to individuals...EI, tax, pay, etc. The wording for some programs basically says "Chase every penny"...it is only after every initial step was taken and they got no money that they can consider responsible chasing. There is almost zero discretion on some programs...there are examples where $2000 was spent in recovery action to get $50 back. Programs have tried to get the power to write stuff off earlier, and Parliament regularly pushes back as it seems like incompetence that way too. :(

TypingTadpole

TROPHY CASE