Ontario: Paying Employees For The Victoria Day Holiday During The Pandemic

Monday May 18, is Victoria Day (Journée nationale des patriotes, or National Patriot’s Day, in Quebec); a holiday which most employees are entitled to take off and receive public holiday pay. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in emergency leaves, temporary layoffs and reduced schedules. As a result, some may have lost track of upcoming long weekends and public holiday pay requirements. Below is a refresher on employee entitlement to public holiday pay in Ontario and how to calculate pay for employees who’s employment has been affected by COVID-19.

Public Holiday Pay

Generally, employees qualify for public holiday pay on Victoria Day if they have worked all of their last regularly scheduled workday before the public holiday or all of their first regularly scheduled workday after the public holiday, or have reasonable cause not to have not done so. This means that some employees whose work has been affected by COVID-19, will still be entitled to the public holiday pay for Victoria Day.

For example, an employee might not be scheduled to work the day right before or after the holiday. As long as the employee works all of their last regularly scheduled shift before the holiday and all of the first one after it, or has reasonable cause for not doing so, they will be entitled to public holiday pay.

Employees on Leave or Layoff

Employees may be entitled to public holiday pay while on leave, including a protected leave related to COVID-19, such a declared emergency leave. If the employee worked the last regularly scheduled day of work before the leave, and the first regularly scheduled day of work after the leave, or has reasonable cause for failing to do so, he or she will be entitled to the paid public holiday.

Similarly, an employee on layoff may be entitled to public holiday pay for a public holiday that occurred while they were laid off as long as he or she works their last regularly scheduled day before the lay off began and her first regularly scheduled day after being recalled, or has reasonable cause for failing to do so, they will be paid for the public holiday.

Calculation of Public Holiday Pay

Despite being entitled to public holiday pay, depending on when the employee took leave or was laid off, the calculation may still result in no payment. Holiday pay is calculated using the regular wages earned by the employee in the four work weeks before the week with the public holiday, plus all of the vacation pay payable during those four work weeks before week with the public holiday, divided by 20.

So, if the employee has spent more than four weeks without wages or vacation pay before the week of Victoria day, the amount of holiday pay collected will be $0. Employment Insurance benefits received during a leave or layoff do not count as wages, and thus will not be counted in the calculation of public holiday pay.

Employees with Reduced Hours

Employees who have reduced hours of work due to COVID- 19 are still eligible for public holiday pay. Specifically, if the employer has agreed to or imposed a reduced work schedule, and the employee works the full reduced shift before the holiday, they will qualify. However, as with leaves and layoffs, employees must have earned wages or vacation pay in the four work weeks before the public holiday, otherwise the amount to which they are entitled will be $0.

Victoria Day, this Year

For many, the May long weekend traditionally means getting the yard and garden ready for summer, and/or spending time with family and friends. However, for many, getting together with loved ones, and shopping for summer goods in the stores may be challenging or not possible. As the long weekend approaches, it is important to remember to socially distance and observe all guidance provided by government authorities. On that note, we wish you a safe and healthy long weekend.

About Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP

Norton Rose Fulbright is a global law firm. We provide the world’s preeminent corporations and financial institutions with a full business law service. We have 3800 lawyers and other legal staff based in more than 50 cities across Europe, the United States, Canada, Latin America, Asia, Australia, Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.

Recognized for our industry focus, we are strong across all the key industry sectors: financial institutions; energy; infrastructure, mining and commodities; transport; technology and innovation; and life sciences and healthcare.

Wherever we are, we operate in accordance with our global business principles of quality, unity and integrity. We aim to provide the highest possible standard of legal service in each of our offices and to maintain that level of quality at every point of contact.

For more information about Norton Rose Fulbright, see nortonrosefulbright.com/legal-notices.

Law around the world

Source: Mondaq

St. John’s couple with pricey travel insurance now stuck with vouchers for cancelled trip

The Chronicle Harold

ST. JOHN’S — With travelling a few times a year, an annual travel insurance policy once made the best sense, but Tom Gordon is re-evaluating that logic after dealing with his insurer.

Gordon contacted The Telegram after seeing the story of senior Joan Jackson, who said she was threatened with being reported to the credit bureau or taken to small claims court if she stopped her monthly payment on her MEDOC travel insurance even though she can’t go on a trip while the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing.

Gordon and his wife pay $93.69 a month combined for their policy.

They had planned a spring trip to Cuba, which they cancelled with reimbursement in the form of vouchers for future travel from Air Transat. Those vouchers have a 24-month expiry date.

Gordon said he understands completely that MEDOC will not approve a claim if he already received Air Transat vacation vouchers, as that would be double reimbursement.

But the decision made him ask about what his protections were under the policy should it be impossible to redeem the vouchers before they expire.

“The situation of cancelled international travel owing to the pandemic spread is certainly fraught. The decision of the federal government to uphold airlines’ policy to issue vouchers rather than refunds is problematic enough. Consumers are involuntarily in the position of giving long-term interest-free loans to airlines,” Gordon told The Telegram.

When he asked the insurance provider what would happen if Air Transat goes bankrupt or either he or his spouse dies before they can use the vouchers, the answer leaves him on the hook for the $3,000 the couple spent on the trip.

“The premiums continue to be charged despite the fact that nobody can travel.” — Tom Gordon

MEDOC said the claim is closed.

“Federal advisory against travel outside the country; subsequent cancellation of Air Transat flights to Cuba. Air Transat has indicated they will issue a voucher valid for 24 months in lieu of a refund. However, we do not foresee the possibility of utilizing this voucher and need to recoup these costs. We have received full refunds from Air Canada for connecting flights that we had for travel between St. John’s and Toronto before and after the Cuba flights,” Gordon wrote on the online form explaining reasons for filing a claim.

“Regarding scenario 1 (the bankruptcy of the airline), since Air Transat has offered you the travel voucher, it is now their responsibility to honour it. As for scenario 2 (a death of either spouse), we sincerely hope that is not one you will need to face. In both cases, your insurance policy does not provide coverage for a travel voucher,” adjusting agency GlobalExcel responded to his inquiry in an email exchange.

“In short, Global Excel contends that because I now hold a theoretical voucher for travel rather than an actual ticket, I no longer have any right to claim regardless of circumstances,” Gordon told The Telegram.

“These circumstances include the cessation of operation of the airline or the death of myself or my spouse — circumstances that are clearly otherwise covered under my policy with MEDOC. … Global Excel has responded unequivocally: the money I paid for a vacation that I may never take is not insured because it now exists in the form of a voucher rather than a ticket.”

The annual travel insurance they once thought was a great idea given their age and amount of and type of travel they do is now being given more scrutiny by Gordon.

Planned vacations to New Zealand and Norway this year are unlikely to go ahead, but the monthly bill continues.

“The premiums continue to be charged despite the fact that nobody can travel,” Gordon said.

Their policy expires in September and they only took one trip so far, last October.

Given the fact that auto insurance premiums were reduced a little to reflect that people are driving less, Gordon said it would have been nice to see some leniency with travel insurance customers, especially when the annual sums can be more than $1,000 and there’s no place they can go.

In a letter emailed to customers on May 15 — the same day the original Telegram story ran — Johnson Insurance, the broker for MEDOC, reminded clients, similar to information in a statement to The Telegram that week, that thousands of MEDOC customers were helped to get back to Canada and that it continues to provide health insurance coverage for those who could not return to the country.

“The number of travel insurance claims has tripled and our teams are working around the clock to ensure that we serve all members to the standards that they deserve,” the statement said.

“For all customers we understand how this pandemic has impacted your plans. Rest assured that your trip cancellation coverage continues for trips booked prior to the travel advisory. Travel within Canada is also still covered, and your policy is still in force.

“However, we truly understand the concerns of those who are unable to travel and we are reviewing how MEDOC® can continue to provide exceptional value to all our customers now and for years to come.”

In response to the latest story, a spokeswoman for Johnson said the following: “We are not able to comment on individual claims due to privacy. As each customer’s situation is different, they should contact us directly if they have questions regarding their claim.”

Source: The Chronicle Harold

Lessons Learned By Employers From COVID-19

The excerpted article was written by Susan Crawford

As we pass the one month mark in this unprecedented pandemic, CCPartners continues to see recurring themes that impact employers’ abilities to respond nimbly to unexpected legislative changes and workplace challenges created by COVID-19.  In this instalment of The Employers’ Edge we take a look at some of these issues and provide guidance to employers on how they can better prepare for unexpected changes in their workplaces.

The Value of Employment Contracts

If COVID-19 has taught employers one thing it is the value of a well-drafted employment agreement.  Millions of employees have been temporarily laid off in Canada as a result various provincial emergency response orders or declarations.  Employers have relied on provincial employment standards legislation to initiate these temporary layoffs where they have either been forced to close as a non-essential business or they simply don’t have enough work even if deemed an essential business.  And while we hope common sense will prevail among decision makers if these layoffs are challenged by employees claiming they were constructively dismissed, the legality of initiating temporary lay-offs for non-union staff without a specific contractual right to do so remains an unanswered question during this pandemic.  CCPartners continues to urge employers to consider the use of employment agreements for all non-union employees– not only to give employers the flexibility to layoff but also to minimize their legal obligations at the time of dismissal and clarify the rights and responsibilities of both the employer and the employee.  Alternatively, employers should consider adding a layoff policy to their existing employee manuals and giving notice to employees of the new policy.

The Need for Comprehensive Working at Home Policies

Many of the questions CCPartners has fielded during this pandemic relate to rights and obligations when employees are asked to work from home.  Since an employee’s home work space is an extension of their workplace, employers need to ensure employees understand the importance of working safely and their obligation to work as if they were in their physical workplace during these uncertain times.   Being able to monitor, assess and respond to remote work issues requires a well-written and comprehensive working from home policy.  Clearly communicating expectations is the best way to ensure employees can work effectively and safely from home in circumstances where an employer is either required to close or cannot provide a workplace that allows for social distancing or other public health and safety measures.

Adequacy of Sick Leave, Vacation and Benefit Plans

Employers have had to take a hard look at their benefit plans in dealing with COVID-19.  Many of our clients were without any kind of sick leave policy when COVID-19 struck and were left trying to adjust to the changing circumstances on the fly.  Attempts to be generous in the beginning by keeping all employees whole even if they were not working or working full-time soon became an expectation that employers could not continue to meet financially.  Without comprehensive policies in place many employers’ responses were inconsistent or created workplace conflicts when applied in a manner that seemed unfair.  Could an employer require employees to take paid vacation time, personal days or use lieu time if they couldn’t provide them with full-time work or they believed that employees did not have enough work to work remotely?  If employers initially paid employees who had to be off because they had been diagnosed with COVID-19 or had family members who had been diagnosed, were they required to continue to pay them as the pandemic wore on?  Many of the answers to these questions depend on the language in workplace policies.  CCPartners recommends that employers should make policy reviews a priority when the world finally “normalizes”.

Develop a Business Continuity Plan

Many workplaces did not give consideration to how they would continue to operate in the unlikely event of an emergency.  When the unlikely became reality in early March 2020 many employers were caught unprepared when they were forced by emergency orders to roll out work contingency plans.  Employers are encouraged to devote resources to developing a business continuity plan with the benefit of hindsight COVID-19 provides when we reach the other side of this pandemic.

Investing in Financial and Legal Experts

Navigating the eligibility for federal subsidy programs, the application of SUB plans or Top-ups for CERB benefits and understanding how to successfully apply for same has underscored the importance of having trusted financial and legal advisors available to assist HR Departments and small businesses maximize the programs that will help ride out this pandemic.  CCPartners has partnered with various financial experts to disseminate vital information to employers through our COVID-19 webinar series.    Continuing to rely on experts as our economy starts to reopen will be important for employers looking to minimize liability and maximize the safe and healthy return of their workforces.

Whatever the future may hold when workplaces are allowed to resume regular operations, COVID-19 has forever changed the landscape of our social and workplace interactions.   Employers would be well served to take stock of their workplace policies and practices and adjust to the “new normal” we will be experiencing when COVID-19 has finally been tamed.

Originally published 23 April, 2020

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Source: Mondaq

With COVID-19, Business Interruption Claims Will Not Be The Only Claims

The excerpted article was written by Mikel Pearce

There has been a lot of coverage, and a lot of ink spilled (does that expression even have meaning any more?) about the potential and actual business interruption claims that may be made by insureds arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, very little attention has been paid, at least so far, to the other potential claims that may arise, and the other classes of business that may be impacted as a result.

Personal Injury and Wrongful Dismissal

First, the pandemic and the resulting lockdown/quarantine have resulted in markedly decreased traffic of all kinds. People aren’t driving, going shopping, or going to movie theatres, concerts, plays, musicals, bars or restaurants. Some estimates indicate that automobile traffic has decreased by 80%.

This will result in a significant reduction in personal injury claims, just based on the math of fewer trips (pedestrian, vehicular or otherwise) resulting in fewer accidents.

This means that the plaintiff personal injury bar will be looking for something to fill the hole left by that lack of personal injury claims. Plaintiff counsel are nothing if not creative.

There is a distinct possibility that at least in part, they may attempt to bring claims against property occupiers on behalf of COVID-19 sufferers, alleging that their clients contracted COVID-19 in a given location, as a result of unsafe conditions at that location. Obviously this sort of claim will place a high burden on the plaintiff to establish that they actually contracted the disease at the alleged location, and not elsewhere, but I think it highly likely that some enterprising plaintiff’s counsel will attempt to bring such claims.

The other claim that plaintiff’s counsel may turn to in order to make up for the lack of personal injury claims is wrongful dismissal claims. At present, everyone who can work from home is working from home. However, at some point businesses will re-open, including those that are currently shut, and employers will tell their employees that they are required to return to work. Some will refuse, citing safety concerns, and they are likely to be dismissed, unless they call upon the Ministry of Labour to do a safety audit of their workplace, which finds it to be unsafe. Given the pervasiveness of the pandemic and the response to it, it is quite likely that the number of wrongful dismissal claims will easily outnumber the “missing” personal injury claims.

The one advantage to wrongful dismissal claims from an insurer perspective is that the indemnity portion of the claim (the claim for “pay in lieu of notice”) is not often insured, and the average spend on defence costs for a wrongful dismissal claim is in the range of $15,000 to $20,000. Even if indemnity is taken into account, the average indemnity payment for a wrongful dismissal lawsuit in Canada is $18,000 to $20,000.

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Claims

The next wave of insurance claims will be driven by the surge in bankruptcies that is likely to result from the prolonged shutdown of the economy.

There are several industries that come to mind that are likely to be affected in this manner.

First, the hospitality industry. There have been rumors that 40-50% of hospitality businesses could go bankrupt as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting shutdown.

Hotels, restaurants, bars and other associated businesses have limited or zero revenue at present, and even if parts of the economy start to open up in the next 30-60 days, in my opinion the hospitality industry will be one of the last portions of the economy to restart, and will have a difficult time attracting patrons at anything like pre-COVID levels, until a vaccine is widely available.

It comes down to a simple question: Even if the restrictions are lifted and restaurants and bars are permitted to open again, how likely are YOU to go to one? Do you really want to be in a crowded bar, or even a restaurant, prior to a vaccine being available? I certainly do not, and most hospitality businesses need a certain level of “occupancy” in order to break even or be profitable.

In my opinion most are unlikely to be able to be profitable for some time, unless they revamp their business model and/or their pricing in a significant manner.

Bankruptcies (or CCAA proposals) in the hospitality sector will lead to a variety of claims against the Directors and Officers of those organizations. These may include claims for unpaid wages, unremitted source deductions, and a variety of other claims from bond or debt holders.

Second, the construction industry. In my view it is quite likely that many employers will look to downsize their physical space as they have been forced to recognize that a good percentage of their employees can be just as effective if they work from home. The second largest expense for many companies, after employee wages, is rent. Many organizations will be looking to cut costs following the pandemic, in order to recover from the economic impact of the shut down. If that happens, the construction of new office towers and new office space in general will grind to a halt, and this will have a ripple effect throughout the construction industry.

Construction tends to be a “cash flow” business. When business is good, everyone gets paid, jobs get done, and most disputes are resolved without resort to expensive and protracted litigation. However, when the economy contracts and contractors encounter financial problems, they are often faced with “breach of trust” claims from sub-contractors and suppliers, who allege that funds from a given project were not used to pay subcontractors and suppliers on that project. These breach of trust claims survive bankruptcy, and so can haunt contractors (and the insurers who end up defending them) long after everything else has been dealt with. The resultant litigation is often messy and expensive.

Third, oil and gas and mining. The price of a barrel of oil is at an historic low. For a brief period, some oil futures traded at negative values. Given the current cost per barrel of oil extraction in Canada, it may be a long time until oil production is profitable in Canada again. This will lead many producers to mothball wells, or to declare bankruptcy and abandon wells instead. Provincial governments (especially in Alberta) will be faced with huge remediation and clean up costs as a result of orphaned wells, and will likely seek to recoup those costs from the Directors and Officers of the former owners of orphaned wells.

This may lead to a resurgence of what is known as the “North Star” problem. In the case of North Star, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment issued remediation orders to the Directors and Officers of North Star following CCAA proceedings. As North Star had exhausted its D&O policy, the Directors and Officers were personally exposed for the clean up costs. While the case was eventually settled (for some $4,750,000), it highlighted a gap in coverage that some insurers and MGAs attempted to fill. Should this issue resurface, some of the impugned organizations will have “North Star” coverage, but many will not, and this could lead to years of litigation against insurers and brokers as a result.

Fourth, the retail industry. It was announced on May 7, 2020, that both Aldo Shoes and Neiman Marcus had begun bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, in the months leading up to the pandemic, a number of significant Canadian retailers had also succumbed to market forces. These included the Nygard Group, FHC Enterprises, Louis Garneau Sports, Le Cordée, Pier 1 Imports, Stokes, and SFP Canada. The retail industry has faced significant challenges from online retailers, and the pandemic will only serve to exacerbate those issues. The resulting bankruptcies or CCAA filings will no doubt lead to a multitude of litigation and insurance claims.

Fifth, the airline industry. No one knows how long it will be before international travel (including travel to the U.S.) is opened up again. Even once it is “allowed”, the number of people willing to travel internationally is likely to be a fraction of what it was prior to the pandemic. The airline industry will face similar challenges to the hospitality industry, in addition to massive class action claims for refunds on cancelled flights, rather than credits toward future flights, which are currently being offered.

Securities Class Actions or Derivative Claims

The final potential claim that I will mention are securities class action claims against corporations, and their Directors and Officers, arising from the massive share price drops caused by the pandemic and the resulting lockdown. Many corporations are now incurring business interruption losses for which they may be uninsured. However, both Marsh and Berkshire Hathaway have publicly stated that they were offering so-called “pandemic coverage” to certain insureds prior to the COVID-19 crisis, but that very few corporations could be convinced to purchase the coverage.

Plaintiffs counsel may commence securities class actions alleging that the corporation would not have sustained such heavy losses (and the resulting share price drop) had the board of directors agreed to purchase the offered “pandemic coverage”.

The All England Tennis Club may be used as an example, given reports that it received a $200,000,000 (CAN) payout from its pandemic coverage policy, as a result of the cancellation of the Wimbledon tennis tournament.

Alternatively, this type of claim could be brought by shareholders as a derivative action on behalf of a given corporation, against the Directors and Officers, alleging that they failed in their duty to protect the corporation by failing or refusing to purchase pandemic coverage.

BI is not the end of the Story

While it may be the case that the vast majority of business interruption losses are not covered (pending various U.S. state legislatures passing laws to the contrary), that is not the end of the story for the insurance implications of the current pandemic. We will be seeing the repercussions of this event for a number of years, and the current pandemic may also contribute to what commentators were already saying was a coming “hard market” where insurance premiums increase, and coverage is narrowed.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.


Meal delivery drivers often not insured if using personal car, broker warns

Most personal auto insurance policies don’t cover vehicles for food or package delivery

The xxcerpted article was written by Paula Duhatschek · CBC News 

Drivers making deliveries for some popular food delivery apps might be unaware their auto insurance may not cover them in the event of a collision, potentially leaving them on the hook for a big bill.

Gary Cormier, 49, of Kitchener, Ont. wants to avoid that situation. He’s been trying for weeks to find a car insurance policy that he can afford, and that will cover him while making deliveries.

Cormier signed up with both DoorDash and Uber Eats this spring and was quickly accepted as a driver after submitting proof of his car ownership, driver’s license and personal insurance.

But when he told his insurance broker about the plan, Cormier says he was told his existing policy with Intact wouldn’t cover him.

Cormier says he contacted three other brokers for good measure and was told the same thing.

“If I was just driving on personal insurance … my claim could be declined,” said Cormier, who says he stopped making deliveries after that point.

Cormier says his broker later gave him a quote for a commercial driving insurance policy, costing about $10,200 annually.

“It’s just not feasible,” said Cormier, whose personal driving insurance currently costs about $1,500 a year.

Most personal auto insurance policies don’t allow the use of personal vehicles for food or package delivery, according to the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario.

That means drivers might not be covered if they use their vehicles for business purposes, the agency said.

‘You could lose everything’

Insurance broker Joseph Carnevale says many drivers are likely delivering food and other items without realizing their personal auto insurance policy doesn’t apply to their present circumstance.

Anyone making money by delivering something needs to tell their insurance broker about it, says Carnevale, and in most cases, a delivery driver would likely need to take out a commercial insurance policy to be covered.

“The problem we face is that someone who’s just trying to make a few dollars on the side then has to [pay] a substantial amount of money for a proper and legal commercial insurance auto policy,” said Carnevale, who is also president of the Insurance Brokers’ Association of Ontario.

“And so there’s a scenario out there right now that probably … the vast, vast majority of people don’t have the proper policies in place and that puts them at risk.”

Although every situation is different, Carnevale says a delivery driver who didn’t have commercial insurance and who submitted a claim after causing serious property damage would likely prompt an investigation and be denied coverage by their insurer.

That kind of accident could put them on the hook for between $5,000 and $100,000, he says. A worst-case scenario type of collision involving multiple deaths could cost millions, he adds.

“You could lose everything,” said Carnevale.

Company policies vary

CBC News asked DoorDash, Skip the Dishes and Uber Eats what kind of insurance their Ontario drivers need to carry.

DoorDash pointed to a statement on the company’s FAQ page saying it does provide excess auto insurance, but this policy only applies toward damage drivers might cause to third parties and only to accidents that happen when a driver is in possession of goods to be delivered.

A spokesperson for Skip the Dishes said in an email that couriers are independent contractors, and it is their responsibility to “obtain and maintain all necessary insurances, permits, and/or licenses required by applicable laws in the region they operate.”


Canada Life Reinsurance enters into major longevity risk reinsurance agreement

WINNIPEG, May 20, 2020 /CNW/ – Canada Life Reinsurance is pleased to announce that it has entered into a long-term longevity reinsurance agreement with NN Life covering €5.3 billion of in-force liabilities. Close to 82,000 of in-payment defined benefit pensioners will be reinsured by Canada Life Reinsurance under this agreement.

Jeff Poulin, Global Head of Canada Life Reinsurance said this agreement is another example of Canada Life Reinsurance’s strength as a partner for reinsurance longevity transactions globally.

“I’m pleased that despite a significantly altered work environment due to Covid-19, Canada Life Reinsurance and NN Life’s teams worked together to complete this major transaction,” said Poulin. “It will allow us to further expand and diversify our global longevity business in 2020 and beyond.”

Derek Popkes, Chief Operating Officer at Canada Life Reinsurance, agreed, adding, “Canada Life Reinsurance remains focused on delivering for our clients in these challenging times. We look forward to a long and mutually beneficial relationship with NN Life. Our commitment to the Dutch market and our strong financials make us a good partner in the Netherlands.”

Canada Life Reinsurance offers a range of innovative risk and capital management solutions for life, health and non-life risk to insurers, reinsurers and pension funds globally.

About NN Life 

NN Life is a subsidiary of NN Group. NN Group is an international financial services company, active in 18 countries, with a strong presence in a number of European countries and Japan. With all its employees, the Group provides retirement services, pensions, insurance, investments and banking to approximately 18 million customers. NN Group includes Nationale-Nederlanden, NN, NN Investment Partners, ABN AMRO Insurance, Movir, AZL, BeFrank and OHRA. NN Group is listed on Euronext Amsterdam (NN).

About Canada Life Reinsurance

Canada Life Reinsurance is a division of The Canada Life Assurance Company and includes certain of its subsidiaries and affiliates. The Canada Life Assurance Company is a subsidiary of Great-West Lifeco Inc.

About Great-West Lifeco Inc.

Great-West Lifeco is an international financial services holding company with interests in life insurance, health insurance, retirement and investment services, asset management and reinsurance businesses. We operate in Canada, the United States and Europe under the brands Canada Life, Empower Retirement, Putnam Investments and Irish Life. At the end of 2019, our companies had approximately 24,000 employees, 197,000 advisor relationships, and thousands of distribution partners – all serving our more than 31 million customer relationships across these regions. Lifeco and its companies have over Can$1.5 trillion in consolidated assets under administration as of March 31, 2020 and are members of the Power Corporation group of companies. Lifeco trades on the Toronto (TSX) Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol GWO. To learn more, visit greatwestlifeco.com.

SOURCE Canada Life Reinsurance

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from ILSTV

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest