Chevron previously lost two separate Employment Standards rulings over same termination
Chevron Canada has prevailed at Alberta's Human Rights Tribunal despite losing two separate Employment Standards rulings over the same termination.
The case centered on whether firing an employee 12 days after he requested medical leave during a sexual harassment investigation constituted discrimination. Tribunal member Jessica Gill ruled it did not, even though Employment Standards found the company owed termination pay and violated job-protected leave provisions.
Joseph Hanna was terminated on Feb. 23, 2022, following investigations into allegations he sexually harassed a co-worker while working in Kazakhstan. He claimed Chevron discriminated against him based on gender and mental disability.
Investigation into sexual harassment claims
Hanna worked as a CP systems completion manager and was seconded to TenzigChevroil in Kazakhstan since 2018, holding the position of TCP FGP systems completion area manager. On Feb. 2, 2022, TCO terminated his secondment following its sexual harassment investigation.
Chevron then launched its own investigation. On Feb. 11, 2022, the company interviewed Hanna about the allegations. On the same day, Hanna requested a leave of absence for medical reasons. Chevron terminated his employment for cause on Feb. 23, 2022, after concluding its investigation.
The company had initiated a short-term disability claim with Sun Life Canada on Feb. 15, but informed the insurer on March 8 that no further assessment was necessary. Hanna's complaint, filed Feb. 16, 2023, alleged the termination discriminated against him based on gender and mental disability.
Was just cause warranted?
An Employment Standards officer determined in May 2023 that Hanna was owed termination pay. The officer stated: "While sexual harassment is a very serious allegation and on its face is sufficiently egregious to warrant just cause, the evidence provided does not support that it was warranted in the circumstances."
A director of Employment Standards separately ruled in August 2023 that Hanna's employment was terminated while on job-protected leave, ordering compensation. However, the Human Rights Tribunal found these rulings did not address discrimination.
Gill wrote: "The fact that the complainant requested a medical leave did not prohibit the respondent from continuing to manage its employment relationship with the complainant, including the previously commenced investigation."
Why questionable timing didn't equal discrimination
The tribunal acknowledged the timing appeared problematic but found Chevron provided sufficient justification. Gill noted that Hanna had repeatedly stated he wanted to cooperate with the investigation, including in his medical leave request where he wrote: "I fully intend to cooperate with the investigation and will attend the meeting this afternoon."
The tribunal found no evidence that Hanna's gender influenced the termination decision and concluded: "The respondent has sufficiently demonstrated that the complainant's employment was terminated for reasons unrelated to his gender or mental health, and had to do with serious and founded allegations of harassment in the workplace."
Gill emphasized that timing alone was insufficient to establish discrimination. The tribunal noted: "The complainant has presented no information, other than timing of the termination, to support a claim for discrimination."
