Wrongful dismissal case in Nova Scotia involves employer pulling job offer last-minute
Even if a worker never shows up for their first shift, that can trigger collective agreement obligations, according to a recent decision.
The Municipality of the County of Kings offered Beverly Margaret Gentleman a full-time permanent position as a planner on Jan. 10, 2023, with a start date of Jan. 18, 2023. Staff were notified. The union president was informed.
But on January 16, 2023, just two days before Gentleman was set to begin, the Municipality pulled the offer, citing a "different planning approach" and claiming the "match was not appropriate.”
Gentleman sued for wrongful dismissal, breach of contract, breach of the duty of honest and good faith contractual performance, and negligent misrepresentation. The Municipality moved to dismiss, arguing the dispute belonged in labour arbitration, not court.
In a decision released Jan. 20, 2026, Justice Gail Gatchalian agreed, ruling that Gentleman was covered by the collective agreement with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2618 the moment she accepted the offer.
When does employment begin?
The Municipality argued Gentleman was never truly an employee since she never worked a day. The court disagreed, pointing to the collective agreement's definition of probationary employees.
Article 4.5 of the collective agreement defines a probationary employee as "an Employee who has been hired but has not completed the six-month probationary period." The court found this language determinative. Once Gentleman accepted the offer for a unionized position, she became an employee under the collective agreement.
The court also cited Article 13.2, which states that "[a] newly hired employee shall be on probation for a period of six (6) months from the date the Employee actually commences employment in the Bargaining Unit." This provision distinguishes between being hired and actually commencing work, supporting the conclusion that employment status can exist before the first day.
Conditional offers in unionized workplaces
The Municipality had included standard conditional language in its offer letter. Paragraph 8 stated: "Offer of employment is conditional upon the completion of all applicable background checks and confirmation of credentials, the results of which must be satisfactory to the employer or will result in termination of your employment."
But the court found this clause didn't allow the Municipality to sidestep its collective agreement obligations. Justice Gatchalian ruled that Gentleman "was subject to a six-month probationary period" and therefore "fell within the definition of 'Probationary Employee' in Article 4.5 of the Collective Agreement."
The court emphasized that once a collective agreement governs the relationship, individual contracts take a back seat. As Justice Gatchalian wrote: "The common law as it applies to individual employment contracts is no longer relevant to employer-employee relations governed by a collective agreement."
Probationary employees can grieve
The ruling clarified that probationary employees aren't without recourse. Article 7.3 of the collective agreement allowed probationary employees to access grievance and arbitration procedures, though with limitations.
The agreement stated that "[a] Probationary Employee may be dismissed during the Probationary period without the Employer having to prove just cause, and in such cases, the Probationary Employee may access the grievance and arbitration procedure, but arbitral review shall be restricted to whether the Employer has complied with Article 5 (No Discrimination) of this Agreement."
The court also noted that arbitrators can review probationary terminations for being "arbitrary, discriminatory, or made in bad faith" under section 41 of the Trade Union Act. Gentleman's application was dismissed for want of jurisdiction, with the court ruling her claims belonged in arbitration, not court.
