Wrongful Dismissal Update: Three Ways to Minimize Termination Pay
As readers of this blog are aware, many wrongful dismissal actions are now being decided by way of summary judgment motions.
This blog summarizes a recent successful summary judgment motion involving a former IBM Canada employee.
The Facts
Ms. Leeming, a 60-year old employee, was terminated by IMB without just cause after 8 years of employment. The only issues to be decided were how much notice of termination she was entitled to receive, and whether she failed to mitigate her damages when she started up her own business after only looking for employment for three months.
How much Notice of Termination Should IMB have Provided the Employee?
IMB argued Ms. Leeming was entitled to about 16 weeks termination pay because she signed an employment contract which referred to a termination policy that was found on IMB’s intranet. She did not read this policy and the trial judge found that the policy was not enforceable.
Ms. Leeming argued she was entitled to 16 months notice of termination however the trial judge concluded she should have received 10 months notice of termination. In coming to this conclusion he noted: “While not an unrestricted, unregulated, or arbitrary determination, deciding what is a reasonable notice period is perhaps more legal art than legal science.”
Was it Reasonable for the Terminated Employee to Start her Own Business?
In the three-month period following the termination of her employment, Ms. Leeming applied for 22 jobs and was interviewed for two positions but she did not receive an offer of full-time employment. Thereafter she started a franchise that provided digital marketing solutions for small and medium size businesses. She did not have any experience or training in this business. When concluding that her decision to start her own business was reasonable, the trial judge quoted with approval from a Court of Appeal decision which stated: “The respondent’s establishment of a new consulting business was clearly a means of mitigation. The fact that the early years of the respondent’s self-employment did not live up to his monetary expectations does not mean that this was an unreasonable attempt at mitigation.”
Lessons to be Learned
- Require all employees to sign an employment contract, which includes a termination clause. In this case, IBM could have limited Ms. Leeming’s termination pay to 12.36 weeks (because she received four weeks working notice of termination) instead of the 43.33 weeks it was ordered to pay her. For more information on the benefits of using employment contracts, click here.
- If an employee is terminated without just cause, offer to provide the employee with a reference. It can help the employee secure new employment faster, which is in the employer’s financial self-interest. In this case the trial judge noted: “ IBM did not provide Ms. Leeming with a letter of reference. It provided her with a two sentence letter verifying her employment with IBM.” Although the judge did not state that he increased the notice period because IBM did not provide a reference it is possible that he did.
- If an employee is entitled to receive reasonable notice of termination then consider offering the employee outplacement counselling which can help the employee secure new employment more quickly. This is also in the employer’s financial self-interest.
For over 25 years, Doug MacLeod of the MacLeod Law Firm has been advising employers on employee terminations. If you have any questions, you can contact him at 416 317-9894 or at [email protected]
The material and information in this blog and this website are for general information only. They should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information referred to in this blog or its links. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog. Readers should obtain appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or the MacLeod Law Firm.
Recent Posts
Doug’s Top 5 Employment Law Stories of 2022
Here are my top 5 employment law stories for 2022: 1. COVID 19 - Temporary Layoffs This issue remains my number one story because this issue impacts so many court cases. Some judges have concluded that a temporary layoff set out in the Infectious Disease Emergency...
Reducing Litigation Risk
In a recent case, Pohl v. Hudson’s Bay Company, 2022 ONSC 5230 (CanLII),an employer was ordered to pay a long service employee the equivalent of about 3 years pay and contribute about $ 35 000 to his legal fees. Although this was a without cause termination case, it...
Employment Law Update: Electronic Monitoring Policy
A new amendment to the Employment Standards Act requires employers with 25 or more employees on January 1st of a given year to put in place a written policy regarding any electronic monitoring processes they use to monitor employees. The deadline for 2022 is October...