Wrongful dismissal briefs (May 6, 2002)

THE DISHONEST RESUME

The Court held that misrepresentation of one’s qualifications for employment is cause for dismissal. After hiring the plaintiff, the employer determined he did not have the training and ability to do the job that he had claimed to have in his resume and cover letter. The employer fired the plaintiff after five months. The Court held the employer had a right to expect the plaintiff could do what he said in his resume, and his inability to do so gave the employer cause to dismiss him. The plaintiff was not awarded damages.
O’Donnell v. Bourgault Industries Ltd., [2002] S.J. No. 145 (Sask. C.A.)

PENALTIES FOR DISHONESTY

The Court decided the appropriate penalty for dishonesty should be determined by considering its nature and circumstances. Where dishonesty is alleged as cause for dismissal, the Court must balance the severity of the misconduct with the severity of the penalty imposed. Dishonesty is cause for dismissal where it undermines the employee’s essential obligations to the employer. The plaintiff was dismissed for dishonesty when the employer discovered that he had not been forthcoming about an available treatment for his medical condition that would have allowed him to return to work in his current position. At the time of his termination, he was working as an accountant. He had 17 years’ service and was 48 years old. He was on leave due to his health condition, and had asked to return to work in a position that carried less responsibility. The Court concluded the plaintiff had been wrongfully dismissed from his employment.
McKinley v. B.C. Tel, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 161 (S.C.C.)

Source: Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP.

To read the full story, login below.

Not a subscriber?

Start your subscription today!