Worker became fed up after months of unpaid training but employer kept saying he wasn't ready to work on his own
An Ontario company must pay a worker for work he did while training because the employer benefitted from the work, an arbitrator has ruled.
Lifetime Security Tech installed and maintained security alarms and surveillance systems for residential and commercial buildings in Toronto. The company also contracted with a developer to install preliminary “rough-ins” for cable access and central vacuum systems in houses under construction.
In March 2011, Lifetime hired Li Yu to install and service surveillance systems. Yu lacked any experience, but the owner agreed to provide one month of free technical training. Yu studied a manual and equipment for two weeks, then began practising in the office. Soon, the owner began taking Yu on service calls so Yu could observe how it was done. Yu also was asked to pick up materials on a few occasions. At this point, there were no discussions on the terms and conditions of Yu’s employment once the training was completed.
In June, Yu was sent to perform rough-in work in several houses for a lump sum, as a bonus until he was adequately trained to do alarm installations. Yu bought a few small tools and a ladder at his own expense to do the work, though he also used some bigger tools owned by the company.
Yu indicated he still wanted to be an alarm technician and the owner told him to continue to read the manual and practice in the office. In August, Yu came along on service calls, but the owner wouldn’t allow him to do any installation work until his rough-in work improved.
Yu became angry and frustrated with the lack of progress and on Aug. 30, he demanded Lifetime pay him for the work he had been doing for the past six months. Since the pay for rough-in work was only a bonus, he felt he was entitled to a salary. The owner told him he wasn’t yet ready to start installing alarms and needed more training. Yu applied to an employment standards officer, who ordered Lifetime to pay Yu unpaid wages, termination pay and vacation pay for the time he had been with Lifetime.
Lifetime appealed the order to pay, claiming Yu didn’t ask for any money other than the bonus for the roughing-in work, and didn’t submit any record sheet setting out the work he claimed to have done. It also claimed Yu hadn’t done any independent work because he wasn’t yet ready, and he needed more training.
The arbitrator found that Lifetime didn’t have enough work to occupy a full-time worker. As the months passed, it became evident that Lifetime only intended to pay Yu for the roughing-in work and not any installation work, said the arbitrator. By extending the training period, Lifetime could avoid paying him but still benefit from his labour. However, Yu was never advised he wouldn’t be paid at all during the training period.
