A small-town bank manager who had an affair with a subordinate—including sex in the bank, during and after hours—should not have been dismissed for cause, according to the Federal Court of Appeal. Nevertheless, given the circumstances, it was not appropriate to reinstate the employee to his job.
It seems that employers must continually learn that it is crucial to have clear written policies in place governing employee conduct and discipline, and to apply those policies consistently. An Alberta Employment Standards Umpire recently heard a case that reiterates the simple lesson.
The three most viewed articles on HRinfodesk this week deal termination due to theft, The Canada Arbitration Board decision about fraudulent medical notes, and a termination substituted with a suspension.
Every organization has disciplinary concerns at some point in time arising from an employee’s actions which are deemed unacceptable to the employer and which may require some form of discipline to be administered. Generally, employees respect the need for discipline and usually appreciate having a disciplinary process that is deemed to be fair and impartial.
An Ontario labour arbitrator just allowed an employee’s grievance after the employer terminated him for swearing, refusing to leave the workplace and threatening the vice-president with a shovel. As horrible as this incident sounds, the employer had absolutely no proof of the events because the employer did not follow its own policy and conduct a proper investigation.
The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench recently challenged the Human Rights Commission’s decision to dismiss an employee’s discrimination complaint based on age as without merit. The employer denies discriminating against the employee on the basis of his age, and maintains that the employee was terminated for poor performance.
If establishing just cause for dismissal is considered to be a difficult task, then doing so on the basis of incompetence might be seen as almost impossible. It is certainly among the toughest of grounds to establish, particularly since it does not involve “misconduct.”
An employer decides to dismiss an employee without notice and without legal cause. Subsequent to the dismissal, in reviewing the employee’s work, the employer discovers a number of errors which, if known at the time, would have been sufficient to support a dismissal for cause. Can the employer successfully argue cause in defence of a wrongful dismissal claim? This is a question I have been asked many times by employers, as a review of a dismissed employee’s work after dismissal often reveals significant errors or, in some cases, outright dishonesty.
A recent Ontario case dealt with an employee’s misconduct that clearly amounted to just cause for termination; however, the employee was still entitled to termination pay.
An employee who hates working and being managed by his or her supervisor – Can this become a human rights issue in the workplace? Well it depends!