Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

[Monarch Butterfly]

Looking over the other "news" organization for reports on the Tina Yazdani scandal. Quiet at the moment, they must be afraid.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Fueling those concerns: At least two of Yazdani’s stories about the Ford government have quietly vanished from CityNews’ website without explanation, including one on Education Minister Paul Calandra’s grad-related memo to school boards in late March. It included an on-camera moment in which Calandra, in a heated exchange, told Yazdani: “Don’t interrupt me. Let me finish and then I’ll get to you.” The next day brought one final on-air appearance — Yazdani covering the Ford government’s budget — before she disappeared. The Calandra story was removed from the website, and her employment was terminated days later.

The question here is did the sitting government order her firing. I can't begin tell you how problematic that would be if this where the case.

 

[thettctransitfanatic]

The question here is did the sitting government order her firing. I can't begin tell you how problematic that would be if this where the case.

I have a feeling that the answer to your question is yes.

 

[Richard White]

I have a feeling that the answer to your question is yes.

That could potentially lead to a constitutional challenge if true.

Firing a journalist for reporting on the government would probably vìolate freedom of the press.

 

[lenaitch]

That could potentially lead to a constitutional challenge if true.

Firing a journalist for reporting on the government would probably vìolate freedom of the press.

That would require an evidence trail to establish, and I suspect they are not that stupid (if true). It would be particularly egregious because it involves and member of the press, but a government influencing the management of any private corporation should be troubling.

I am not surprised about the radio silence on her termination. That is pretty standard in the media for pretty much any departure except retirement. All of a sudden, you simply no longer exist. They are pretty much at-will employees.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

That would require an evidence trail to establish, and I suspect they are not that stupid (if true). It would be particularly egregious because it involves and member of the press, but a government influencing the management of any private corporation should be troubling.

I am not surprised about the radio silence on her termination. That is pretty standard in the media for pretty much any departure except retirement. All of a sudden, you simply no longer exist. They are pretty much at-will employees.

I got that too. It's just that the timing of the thing, plus her colleagues being taken suddenly back by this raised a red flag for me.

 

[zang]

I might be tightening up my resume if I were Colin D’Mello; he’s been a thorn in Ford’s side forever.

That said, Global has never seemed anywhere close to as cozy with conservatives as City.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Ontario proposes ban on requiring workers to pay for uniforms​

From https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/politics/queens-park/article/ontario-proposes-ban-on-requiring-workers-to-pay-for-uniforms/?cid=sm%3Atrueanthem%3Actvtoronto%3Atwitterpost&taid=69de80ccba4ee50001ede7bb

Ontario’s labour minister is proposing to ban employers from making employees pay for their uniforms.

David Piccini says no one should have to pay out of pocket for a uniform just to earn a paycheque.

The government says the change addresses a common but overlooked issue in entry-level sectors such as retail, hospitality and food service, where some workers pay upwards of $50.

The ban would apply when uniforms are mandatory and employer-specific, such as including a logo, and not reasonably usable outside work.

Consultations on the rule change will look at exempting small businesses.

The government is also proposing to make new rules around talent agencies, including setting a limit on commission rates and requiring timely payment to entertainment workers.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 14, 2026.

Curious. Isn't a business suit and tie a "uniform"?

 

[T3G]

Go even further than that: drop the ridiculous notion of uniforms all together.

 

[Richard White]

Go even further than that: drop the ridiculous notion of uniforms all together.

You need them

 

[T3G]

The only professions that need uniforms are the ones where being able to quickly identify a person so employed in a crowd of people is paramount to public safety: police officers, parademics, firefighters and their offshoot professions (security guards, etc). In all other professions they are superflous to the maximum degree. Being behind a cash register or stocking shelves in a grocery store is proof enough that the person works there, no one is going to do that job for fun.

And most of them look goofy as all hell. Only a culture that has normalized wearing sweatpants and crocs in public could possibly think that the uniforms retail service workers wear in any way reflect positively on the company. I feel infinitely stupid wearing them, and feel that anyone else who wears them also looks infinitely stupid. No style, no class, no dignity - finely befitting the mindless corporate automatons they want us to be.

 

[picard102]

Looking over the other "news" organization for reports on the Tina Yazdani scandal. Quiet at the moment, they must be afraid.

If only there was a media criticism outlet in Canada that wasn't too busy conducting phishing campaigns on people being mean to them on reddit.

 

[81-717]

Go even further than that: drop the ridiculous notion of uniforms all together.

The only professions that need uniforms are the ones where being able to quickly identify a person so employed in a crowd of people is paramount to public safety: police officers, parademics, firefighters and their offshoot professions (security guards, etc). In all other professions they are superflous to the maximum degree. Being behind a cash register or stocking shelves in a grocery store is proof enough that the person works there, no one is going to do that job for fun.

And most of them look goofy as all hell. Only a culture that has normalized wearing sweatpants and crocs in public could possibly think that the uniforms retail service workers wear in any way reflect positively on the company. I feel infinitely stupid wearing them, and feel that anyone else who wears them also looks infinitely stupid. No style, no class, no dignity - finely befitting the mindless corporate automatons they want us to be.

Also make it socially acceptable for employees to wear shorts & t-shirts (be it a company uniform or not) when it's hot outside, the last thing anyone wants is to be sweaty & uncomfortable during their shift. Walking to the office in jeans, a suit & tuxedo when it's +30 would be a nightmare.

 

[lenaitch]

Also make it socially acceptable for employees to wear shorts & t-shirts (be it a company uniform or not) when it's hot outside, the last thing anyone wants is to be sweaty & uncomfortable during their shift. Walking to the office in jeans, a suit & tuxedo when it's +30 would be a nightmare.

I'm not sure how any piece of legislation can make something "socially acceptable".

Workplace attire is all part of corporate branding. Bay St. lawyers and accountants have their brand. You want to be a partner, don't wear crocs to work.

I don't see anything wrong with a business wanting to maintain a corporate brand, be it a logo'd golf shirt or a full MacDonalds uniform. It's their image, not yours. I do; however, disagree with making employees pay for it.

 

[gabe]

Nothing wrong with uniforms. But it's absurd that the employee has to pay to wear one!! ( Tim Horton's) If you're making staff wear a uniform it should be paid for by the employer.