Tony Martin: Why 100,000 CDN franchisee families should keep his family in their thoughts.

February 17, 2014

The Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure) Act, 2000 exists because of Martin. He draws people together is a way only an Irish immigrant could.
Tony Martin

I would suggest ALL franchisees, everywhere, who know enough to value the legal protections that “good faith, fair dealings and commercially reasonable” might give to their life, recognize this, faith-filled parliamentarian’s fearless role in not managing but eradicating  predatory industry practices, starting in 1996.

As reported in the Sault Star, NDP colleagues offer words of support after Tony Martin hospitalized after suffering stroke:

The longtime NDP politician and anti-poverty activist reportedly suffered the stroke Sunday.

Bud Wildman, former provincial cabinet minister and a close friend, said doctors are hopeful Martin, 65, will recover.

He said Martin’s family is by his side.

“I’m concerned for my friend. He’s a strong person. I’m hoping he’ll make a full recovery,” said Wildman.

My thoughts are with Bud, Madge, Karen and Jacques and especially Anna and their children.


$50,000 franchisee award: mental distress caused by the franchisor’s bad faith dealings

November 19, 2010

A recent Ontario appeal court decision is very important for every Canadian franchisee.

On September 16, 2010 the Ontario Appeal Court confirmed a $50,000 award for mental distress.

First time ever. Read it here:

Suddenly the economics of pleading good faith has tipped significantly in franchisees’ favour, not just in Ontario but beyond Canada as well..

Some systems have 50, 100 or 1,000 franchisees.

You do the math of the aggregate value of a group or class action lawsuit.

You still need protection against choosing the wrong attorney but great news this fall.

Kudos: First franchisee call-out on internet:

Jeff Lefler, National Bread Network, October 21, 2010

[full chronology on Blue MauMau]


Naming franchising’s Fair Go

October 10, 2008

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”

Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare

Let’s get this straight: The following terms can mean something or they can mean less than anything.

They can provide:

  • protection for reliant investors so they can make decisions that efficiently allocate their capital for worthwhile (not fraudulent) activities or
  • they can be another in a long line of broken promises, cynical wordsmithing and blatant misrepresentations that lead to personal and economic catastrophes.

To me the following terms are interchangeable:

  1. good faith,
  2. fair dealings.
  3. commercially reasonable or
  4. unconscionable conduct.

Number 1 and 2 have been implicit in all United States contracts, forever. Numbers 1, 2 and 3 were added up together in Ontario, Canada since 2000 (S. 3, Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000).

All of the terms have not delivered on their promise.

Big Franchising cooled out hot legislators and rallies friendly parliamentarians and regulators so they can continue to sell poo-filled, and enable more common, blatantly toxic franchise systems such as 3 for 1 Pizza and Wings.

Weasel words delivered by an il Duce franchise lawyer are the cornerstones of make-believe protection that I call McLaws.

BTW

I like heraldry and symbolism because they form the basis for corporate identity and branding. This one is Queen Elizabeth II’s Personal Standard in Australia (left) and I included the Queen’s Personal Flag to show the rose garland detail.

The flag consists of a banner of the coat of arms of Australia, defaced with a gold seven-pointed star with a blue disc containing the letter E below a crown, surrounded by a garland of golden roses. Source

A black swan and maltese cross? Beauty.


%d bloggers like this: