First Reference Talks

Business, Payroll, Employment Law, Internal Controls & You!

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Free Updates

The importance of notice and manner of dismissal

Author: Christina Catenacci

Posted on Friday, January 22nd, 2010 at 2:24 pm

I recently read an Alberta case where a financial consultant, a top performer, was terminated without notice. The court found he was wrongfully dismissed and terminated in an insensitive manner; this error in judgment cost the employer $2.2 million in damages.

The employer in question recruited the employee from a competitor where he was also considered a top performer. While working with the employer, his book of business (an accumulated asset base of his clients who had accounts with the brokerage house) grew from about $75 million to about $150 million. Despite the employee’s great abilities and performance, the employer decided that the employee should be terminated for cause without reasonable notice.

The employee brought an action for wrongful dismissal against the employer asserting no just cause for the termination. The employer argued cause for the termination citing the employee’s failure to obtain approval for his private placements contrary to company policy.

The court disagreed with the employer’s argument and decided there was no cause for dismissal. It was clear that the employee was not the only employee of the firm who did not disclose private placements. Other financial advisors had the same private placements as the employees and faced no disciplined whatsoever. The company policy was unclear and inconsistently enforced, and the employee was actually in the process of complying with the policy when the termination took place.

As a result, the employee was entitled to termination pay in lieu of notice. The court considered several factors to determine the amount of notice:

  • He was recruited by the employer from a secure position
  • He was the star of the firm
  • Similar employment was not available
  • He was employed for seven years

The court awarded the employee a 12-month notice period.

However, the story does not end there; on top of a finding of failing to provide notice, the court also found that the employer’s actions in purporting to dismiss the employee for cause were both unfair and insensitive. The employee was awarded additional damages for the employer’s manner of dismissal. The court took into account that the employee was enticed by the employer to join the firm, the loss of his book of business and reputation were crucial for a financial advisor, and a sudden departure without reason raised suspicion and had a significant detrimental affect on his reputation in the industry.

Thus, the court awarded the employee $1,600,000 in damages for the manner of dismissal. In total, taking into account the extended notice period, the employer had to pay the employee $2.2 million.

What now? How does this case impact employers, and what practical steps can they take to avoid similar liabilities?

There are two types of termination notice to consider: statutory and common law. The first is defined by employment standards legislation as the minimum amount of time an employer must provide to an employee it plans to terminate depending on the length of time an employee works for a company. The second is a variable amount considered reasonable under the circumstances, determined by the court. The court will consider several factors to determine the length of a common law notice period such as the character of employment (employee’s responsibilities, duties and salary); the length of service of the employee; the age of the employee; the availability of similar employment; whether the employee was enticed away from an otherwise secure job to join the employer, among others.

It’s important to note that in wrongful dismissal suits, courts will award both types of notice and that common law awards are often much greater than the legal minimums. To avoid going to court and facing excessive damages, it is crucial for employers to provide proper notice of termination when there is no real cause for termination. An employer would not be able to prove just cause if, by action or inaction, it condoned the conduct. Employers must also remember to terminate in a manner that is respectful and sensitive taking into account the specific circumstances surrounding the termination.

Case: Soost vs. Merrill Lynch Canada Inc.

That is my rendition on the case… comments are welcomed!

Christina Catenacci,
First Reference Human Resources and Compliance Assistant Editor

Click on pen to Use a Highlighter on this page
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Tags: Alberta, Alberta employment standards act, canadian employment law, common law notice, employment standards act, manner of dismissal, reasonable notice, respectful termination, sensitive termination, severance, statutory notice, termination notice, termination without cause, wrongful dismissal

This entry was posted on Friday, January 22nd, 2010 at 2:24 pm and is filed under Employment Standards, Human Resources. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Note that some comments may be moderated. If you have not had an approved comment here before, your comment will be held for approval. We are glad to publish comments that address issues raised in the post or other comments on it and that contribute to a fruitful discussion. We do not publish comments that seek to promote commercial products or that seek personal legal advice. Although we do not require it, we ask that in making a comment you use your full name. You must supply a valid email address, which will not appear with your comment.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

  • Get Free Updates

    RSS and Email

  • Blog Authors

    Yosie Saint Cyr! Adam Gorley Christina Catenacci 
    More Authors
  • Categories

    • Human Resources
      • Accessibility Standards
      • Corporate Immigration
      • Employment Standards
      • Health and Safety
      • HRMS
      • Human Rights
      • Payroll, Compensation and Benefits
      • Privacy and Security
      • Recruiting and Hiring
      • Training and Development
    • Internal Controls
      • Environmental Law
      • IT, Privacy and Security
      • Not-for-Profit
  • Recent Comments

      Commentforeign worker:
      hi, i just want to ask something about the 4 year cap, i’ve been working in...

      Commentkevin p. baxter:
      Just a heads up…. I have had an individual with the same name as me but a...

      CommentAdam Gorley:
      Good idea Sandra! I like it. I think if I did that though I’d be afraid that...

  • Follow us!

    Follow us on Twitter!   

  • Links

    • First Reference
    • HR eSource
    • HRinfodesk
    • HRtrack
    • Human Resources Advisor
    • PolicyPro
  • Blogroll

    • All About Information
    • Chambers on the Profession
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Governance & Risk Management Blog
    • Corporate Reporting to Stakeholders
    • Daniel A. Lublin Employment Law Blog
    • Doorey’s Workplace Law Blog
    • Employment & Human Rights Law in Canada
    • Human Right in the Workplace
    • International Corporate Governance
    • Leech Talks Risk
    • Marks on Governance
    • Osgoode Labour & Employment Law Society
    • SBH Lawyers blog
    • Slaw
    • Thoughts from a Management Lawyer
  • Post Archives

    • September 2010 (7)
    • August 2010 (28)
    • July 2010 (26)
    • June 2010 (29)
    • May 2010 (32)
    • April 2010 (24)
    • March 2010 (22)
    • February 2010 (9)
    • January 2010 (11)
    • December 2009 (11)
    • November 2009 (14)
    • October 2009 (16)
    • September 2009 (11)
    • August 2009 (1)
  • Questions?

    Email us:
    editor[at]firstreference.com
  • Disclaimer

    The contents of this site are intended for educational purposes only.

    We encourage anyone in a situation requiring legal advice to seek professional consultation from an accredited lawyer recognized by the bar society in their jurisdiction of practice.

    First Reference blog is an open forum for ideas, intended to stimulate discussion. The views expressed in posts and comments are those of the individual contributor and may not be reflective of the views of other authors or readers, or the publisher.

Copyright © 2010 - First Reference | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Twitter | Facebook

WordPress theme designed by web design