CIBC call centre worker disconnected

A Nova Scotia call centre worker’s past harassment and her unhappiness didn’t mitigate the seriousness of her disrespect of a client on a call, according to an adjudicator who upheld her dismissal.

The worker was hired by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) in July 2010 to be a financial representative at the bank’s telephone banking centre in Halifax. Just less than three years later, she was appointed to the position of team leader, which involved developing and coaching employees at the call centre and providing customers with good sales and service experience. She was responsible for converting contacts into new sales, maintaining good service levels, reaching her team’s performance targets and meeting quality assurance standards for telephone banking. The worker supervised a team of between 12 and 15 financial services representatives (FSRs).

CIBC has a code of conduct that emphasizes the high level of trust between the bank and its employees with the community. Team leaders are held to even higher standards, as they serve as role models for FSRs and are expected to ensure employees uphold the standards of conduct and maintain confidentiality with customer information. The worker’s employment agreement incorporated the code of conduct and stated that just cause for dismissal included “dishonesty, failure to perform your duties in a satisfactory manner or a material breach of the terms and conditions of your employment, including any applicable code of conduct.”

The worker was in a relationship with a co-worker at the telephone banking centre until Jan. 4, 2016, when her partner physically assaulted her. This led to him being charged by police, after which he was released and returned to work. The worker advised her senior manager that her relationship had ended, her ex had been physically abusive and he was harassing her in the workplace.

Worker breached confidentiality

CIBC investigated and advised the worker not to speak to two employees whose names she had submitted as witnesses who could corroborate her harassment claim, as they would be interviewed in the investigation. However, the investigation determined that the worker had in fact talked to one of the witnesses the night before his interview and the only information the witness was able to provide in the investigative interview was what the worker had told him.

When CIBC interviewed the worker’s ex, he mentioned that the worker had disclosed confidential things about co-workers to him. When he gave examples, it was information that he could not have known unless the worker told him. He also said that the worker was using and possessed drugs in the workplace.

CIBC asked the worker about sharing information about co-workers with her ex, to which she said, “I’m sure I said things that I shouldn’t have — likely said too much.” There was no evidence about her using drugs and the worker was upset that her ex made the unfounded allegations.

On Jan. 24, the worker went off work on short-term disability for four months. CIBC continued the investigation, during which other employees accused the worker of working as a stripper while she was on sick leave. CIBC was obligated to investigate this, which turned out to be false. The employees who made the accusation were disciplined.

She returned on a part-time basis in May and full-time in June and CIBC accommodated her by scheduling her on an offset schedule from her ex. She later requested to work the same schedule as him, saying her ex was no longer bullying her and “as long as he does not bother me at work it will be fine.”

On July 16, the worker requested a transfer to another call centre, but CIBC denied the request because she was under discipline for breaching confidentiality in the investigation back in January. She was given a formal disciplinary letter on July 26 that stated: “your lack of judgment and breaches of confidentiality are unacceptable and cannot happen again.” The letter also outlined the specific element of the code of conduct that the worker breached and warned that similar breaches would lead to further disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment.

Disagreement with client

On Nov. 7, 2016, an FSR told the worker that a client on the phone was looking for help with a refund of charges applied to an account that were the result of him being in a mental institution. The client felt that the refusal to reimburse the charges was making his mental illness worse and asked to speak to a supervisor. The worker told the client that CIBC wasn’t willing to reimburse him and “we all have our issues” and “I don’t want to discuss mental illness anymore.” She put him on hold at various times and made comments about the call being stupid and that “some people feel entitled… I don’t even think he’s mentally ill.” She made some other comments and ended the call by calling the client “rucking idiot.”

Several other employees, including FSRs and other team leaders, overheard the comments and reported the call to management. The worker approached another team leader and asked if she was going to “tell on her,” then left work and called in sick the next day.

CIBC terminated the worker’s employment on Nov. 9 for multiple violations of the code of conduct and the worker filed a complaint of unjust dismissal under the Canada Labour Code.

The adjudicator agreed that the worker’s handling of the telephone call was a serious breach of CIBC’s code of conduct and harmed her credibility for instructing and assisting FSRs in handling customer calls. The call couldn’t be considered a momentary lapse as it lasted 21 minutes and the worker made comments to others while the client was on hold as well as to the client. In addition, there was no evidence her behaviour on the call could be connected to the stress the worker may have been experiencing from her other issues, said the adjudicator.

The adjudicator noted that the worker had previous discipline, including her breach of privacy and the code of conduct during the harassment investigation in January 2016, for which she was warned about future misconduct. The worker had also received three previous warning letters in 2010 and 2011, for not answering a call, breaching privacy for giving another client’s RRSP account number without confirming the caller’s identity and using inappropriate language in the workplace.

The adjudicator determined that the worker’s conduct on the phone call was serious enough to provide just cause — particularly given the high standard of conduct for CIBC employees and team leaders — she had been previously disciplined and warned about her misconduct and given a chance to improve, and her harassment and personal issues had nothing to do with the misconduct. The termination was upheld and the worker’s complaint was dismissed.

For more information, see:

• Crawford and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Re, 2020 CarswellNat 6041 (Can. Lab. Code Adj.).