If there is a need to provide an impartial assessment of the correct notice period, consider using Barry Fisher's data base. It is found here.
The Ontario Court of Appeal in a 1998 decision used the then contents of the data base to determine that the "rule of thumb" of one month per year of service was not a rule at all: 1
Moreover, it is not reflected in the wrongful dismissal awards made daily by trial judges. In a recent paper, "Measuring the Rule of Thumb in Wrongful Dismissal Cases" (1998), 31 C.C.E.L. (2d) 311, Barry Fisher used his wrongful dismissal data base (nearly 1,600 cases at the time) to show that the rule of thumb had little or no validity as a predictor of reasonable notice for short term or long term employees, though it had "some validity for cases in the mid-seniority range" (at p. 317). Mr. Fisher concluded that the rule of thumb was not an "all embracing formula" (at p. 317). Indeed, Cronk itself implicitly rejects the rule of thumb approach. Ms. Cronk, a 30-year employee, was awarded 20 months' notice at trial, reduced to 12 months on appeal.
Barry's data base has been referenced with approval in numerous other decided cases.