Bank employee studied for real estate licence
This instalment of You Make the Call features a bank employee who was fired because she had another job her employer didn’t like.
Marilyn Patterson was a customer service supervisor for Scotiabank in Pitt Meadows, B.C. She had worked for the bank since 1996 and had a history of good performance reviews.
As part of her job, Patterson interacted occasionally with customers and sometimes recommended the types of service they needed, either at her branch or at another branch. In addition to her job, she also operated a small business selling party candles. Scotiabank was aware of her side project but didn’t have any issues with it. However, she was governed by Scotiabank’s guidelines for business conduct, which she had signed when she started with the bank. The guidelines stipulated that she must inform her manager if there was a risk of a conflict of interest and she could not “work in a business which competes with the bank or engage in any activity likely to compromise the position of the bank.”
Patterson’s family was involved in the real estate development business and they encouraged her to study to become a licensed realtor. She began studying and informed Scotiabank while interviewing for the position at the Pitt Meadows branch.
In early 2008, she completed her courses and joined a local realtor, working there on evenings and weekends. There was no indication she did any real estate work while at Scotiabank, though she did give business cards to colleagues at the bank.
After Patterson distributed her business cards at work, Scotiabank became aware she was working as a realtor. On Feb. 15, 2008, her manager told her he thought there could be a conflict and he would check it out. Patterson indicated she didn’t want to give up her part-time job as a realtor.
On March 4, Patterson received a letter stating that the bank’s policy was to prohibit employees with “direct or indirect sales responsibilities” to work as real estate agents. Because Patterson’s job involved determining sales opportunities and referrals, the bank felt there was a risk she would attempt to solicit real estate business from customers.
Patterson told Scotiabank she would never abuse her powers as a bank employee and had not done so in 12 years of service, but Scotiabank indicated its concern was for a perceived conflict. It stated that if she continued selling real estate, she would not be able to continue in her position. It also told her she was free to pursue other opportunities with Scotiabank where there would not be a conflict of interest, but she refused. Scotiabank terminated her employment, effective March 10, 2008.
Should Patterson have been allowed to continue working in her position?
OR
Did Scotiabank have grounds for dismissal?
If you said the bank had grounds for dismissal, you’re right. The court found its guidelines for conduct were not ambiguous and Patterson was aware of them. Though the guidelines didn’t specify being a real estate agent as a specific conflict of interest, it would be difficult to list every possible scenario, said the court. But the court found the guidelines were clear that employees needed to discuss outside business interests and potential conflicts of interest with the employer.
The court also found this requirement was reasonable to protect the bank’s business and was handled on a case-by-case basis. Her previous venture selling candles was a different situation, as there was no potential conflict. Scotiabank considered Patterson’s situation and found it to be unacceptable. The bank gave her a chance to resolve the situation but she refused, said the court.
