Error prone worker fired without notice

Was summary dismissal justified after worker's multiple errors and defiance of superiors?

This instalment of You Make the Call looks at a case before the British Columbia Supreme Court where a worker was fired after a making a mistake which affected the employer’s ability to serve certain clients.

Martha McGachie, 66, was an employment counsellor for the Victoria Immigrant and Refugee Centre Society in Victoria, B.C., from May 2000 until her dismissal in 2004. During her time with the society, her probationary period was extended multiple times and her supervisor had warned her each time that her job performance needed to improve. He also recommended she be let go because of her incompetence.

In the year before her firing, McGachie committed some significant mistakes which prompted a warning letter telling her any more similar errors would likely result in termination. Three months later her supervisor sent her an e-mail calling attention to her latest error. She was advised the e-mail would be “kept on your personnel file” but she was not warned of possible dismissal as before.

The Society had a contract with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) for employment assistance services for its clients. McGachie was told that any documents regarding clients and their applications should not be sent to HRSDC without her supervisor’s approval.

On Jan. 26, 2004, her supervisor was out of the office and she sent a return-to-work plan for two clients without his approval. It turned out the clients were not eligible for assistance and the situation called attention to a “grey area” in the society’s contract with HRSDC through which it had been able to arrange assistance for many of its clients. With focus now turned to this “grey area” of the contract, the HRSDC was able to clarify its policy and as a result many of the society’s clients were no longer eligible for assistance.

McGachie’s supervisor and director met with her on Feb. 16, 2004, and she was asked to acknowledge this major mistake in writing. She refused to do so, claiming it was “tantamount to a probationary period” and she preferred to serve clients in her own way. The supervisor and director did not accept her response and she was summarily dismissed. McGachie sued for damages in lieu of notice as she claimed was never given a formal appraisal or discipline.


You make the call

• Was summary dismissal justified?
OR
• Is the worker entitled to damages in lieu of notice?

If you said summary dismissal was justified, you’re right. The court took into account the worker’s past performance, the supervisor’s reprimands and warnings and the fact the society’s policy of document approval was clear.

The court recognized McGachie’s mistake had a significant and negative impact on the society’s business and it warranted discipline. Considering the warnings issued to her in the past, probation was a reasonable form of discipline. However, when McGachie refused to acknowledge her mistake in writing, her actions “constituted insubordination in failing to comply with a reasonable direction from her superiors.”

McGachie did not accept her supervisor’s request to acknowledge her mistake in writing, which showed she did not feel it was necessary to follow his direction. The court stated that refusing a reasonable and “lawful” direction from superiors is legitimate grounds for summary dismissal.

“In view of the earlier mistakes and warnings and the significant consequence of her acknowledged mistake, (McGachie’s) rejection of reasonable discipline and her indication she intended to continue to ‘approach’ her work in her own way disclosed a refusal to follow a lawful direction. This was a repudiation of the employment contract which justified her summary dismissal.”

For more information see:

McGachie v. Victoria Immigrant & Refugee Centre Society, 2007 CarswellBC 184 (B.C. S.C.).

To read the full story, login below.

Not a subscriber?

Start your subscription today!