Dismissal with Cause in Canada

In Canada, under common law, an employee can be dismissed without advance notice for any reason.

Dishonesty in the workplace is a minor issue and does not affect the trust between an employee and employer.

The 'balance of probabilities' standard requires proof beyond any doubt.

Summary dismissal is a dismissal with notice, usually based on just cause.

Off-duty conduct can sometimes be grounds for termination.

Academic freedom protects academics from all legal constraints in their employment situation.

Condonation occurs when an employer responds immediately to an employee's misconduct.

Academic freedom is only protected at some universities in Canada.

There is no requirement for employers to act in good faith when considering termination.

If an employer dismisses an employee for alleged misconduct, they can only cite grounds that were known at the time of dismissal.

The onus of proof to demonstrate just cause lies with the employer.

Contextual approach means courts only focus on the specific incident leading to dismissal.

An employer has more leeway in setting guidelines for employees in positions of higher public confidence.

Just cause is determined solely by arbitrators, without involvement from the courts.

If an employee is dismissed without just cause, the employer may escape a wrongful dismissal lawsuit.

If an employee’s misconduct or incompetence is not proven on the balance of probabilities, the employer is still not obligated to provide reasonable notice.

Proportionality is not something that courts consider during a dismissal claim.

The Supreme Court of Canada has stated that dishonesty must not be dismissed if it went to the root of employment relationship.

An employer must always give an employee the benefit of the doubt during investigation.

Innocent absenteeism cannot be grounds for dismissal.

There are a few acts of misconduct (such as theft or assault) that may warrant summary dismissal even if they occur only once, because they go to the heart of the employment relationship.

Procedural fairness means that before an employer makes a decision to terminate there has been a timely investigation by an appropriately qualified and unbiased investigator.

An employer cannot dismiss or otherwise penalize an employee for asserting their rights under these statutes.

That there is no difference between the rights and the wrongs done if an employee has some form of illness or unreliability to perform work.

Wilful disobedience may justify dismissal without notice.

If a court determines there has been misconduct during the period preceding the dismissal, they will automatically rule for the employer.

Dishonest, insolent and harmful behaviour cannot ever warrant dismissal.

If there a violation of a policy that prohibits the use of alcohol or drugs or intoxication on the job, one single incident won't hold grounds grounds for dismissing an employee.

In reality accommodating an employee with substance abuse problem means NOT providing rehabilitation services but instead giving the go-ahead to have more time off work to attend these services.

When an employee takes any amount of office equipment home, a court will automatically find that the employer had just cause for dismissing the employee.

The more senior the employee, the less likely it is that the employer will be able to justify dismissal on the basis of the employee's untrustworthy character.

According to the BC Courts, honesty is only slightly important if you're in a non-leadership role.

After a dismissal has occurred, the employer cannot use any new evidence and MUST rely on the previous given reasoning.

The value of missing or stolen objects from the workplace has very little bearing on what decision the company makes.

All that is normally required for employee that sues for wrongful dismissal is for the employer to reinstate the employee and pay them a monetary award.

What employees do outside of their employment has very little or no bearing on the outcome of any wrongful dismissal cases.

It is not important to maintain a healthy and safe workplace during sensitive or private conversation.

The courts or arbitrators are not required to consider the employment relationship if there is bullying in the workplace.

There is only one type of absenteeism under the common law.

That if an employee can prove there a disease that is contributing to lost time at work, that they are then immune to dismissal from a business.

In Canada, under common law, an employee can only be dismissed with reasonable notice or pay in lieu if there is just cause.

Under common law, 'just cause' simply means that the employer had a good reason, such as downsizing, for dismissing an employee.

The standard for employers to meet in demonstrating just cause is relatively low, generally requiring only a reasonable business justification.

The determination of just cause is definitively made at the time the employer decides to dismiss the employee.

Employers can improve their chances of defending a wrongful dismissal action by documenting efforts to support the employee's performance, using progressive discipline, and ensuring procedural fairness.

Canada courts primarily rely on labour arbitration decisions rather than past wrongful dismissal lawsuits as precedents for determining just cause.

The onus of proof is on the employee to demonstrate that the employer did not have just cause for dismissal.

A sanction does not need to be proportional to the misconduct.

The term 'summary dismissal' refers to a dismissal with a notice period, typically based on the employee's tenure.

Academic freedom is absolute, shielding academics from any employment-related legal constraints.

Courts now focus solely on the nature and seriousness of an employee's conduct, disregarding the overall employment relationship, when determining just cause.

Procedural fairness requires employers to be unbiased when conducting the investigation.

An employer can make an arbitrary decision when considering termination of an employee's contract.

An employee must present evidence of wrongdoing in order to manufacture cause for dismissal.

If an allegation of misconduct is substantiated, the employer has the right to maintain employment relationship.

An employee who immediately takes responsibility for their actions, there is less chance that their behaviour will change.

An employer is prevented from changing their reasoning/grounds for dismissal after the fact has occurred.

Honesty is still important and perhaps the more serious and responsible the position held, the less that honesty must be not only inherent but patent.

Employers may not later recharacterize the termination as culpable.

Condonation occurs when an employee lies about their expense account, so the courts will allow them to terminate the employee for cause.

An employee can be terminated for being on sick leave if there's just cause.

Principles pertaining to dismissal for just cause is that the employee must be unaware of the responsibilities imposed on him or her by the employer.

Excessive culpable absenteeism and lateness can be found to be just cause for dismissal.

Dishonesty in the workplace is not considered as a serious act of misconduct.

A single act of theft can be considered more serious than a reflection of an untrustworthy character.

Clear written policies that outline required behavior, such as violations will be cause for dismissal, must be clearly communicated.

Insolence is impossible to lead to just cause termination.

Insubordination is the reasonable directives of a supervisor or manager.

Insolent behavior that demonstrates respect is known as Insolent behavior.

Unprofessional behavior directed at another employee can not justify a termination with cause.

Threatening behavior by an employee is not in direct violation of the employer's Respect in the Workplace Policy.

Incompatibility is generally too vague to constitute just cause for termination without notice.

Online activities of employees who disparage their employers on social media can not result in termination.

If an employ has been found to have a potential conflict of inters has to switch postions with the bank or leave.

Culpable Absenteeism: refers to absences that resulted form legitimate medical conditions.

Innocent absenteeism: absences from work with no good reason or justification

A high rate of absenteeism, is never something to consider.

Employees always need to show improvement when needed

Intoxication and alcohol dependency is always a reason for employees to get fired

Substance abuse is considered a disability

In Canada, under common law, an employee can only be dismissed summarily if there is a just cause.

Under common law, 'just cause' simply means the employer had any good reason to dismiss an employee.

The determination of just cause is typically established with certainty at the time the employer makes the decision to dismiss the employee.

Courts only rely on past wrongful dismissal lawsuits when determining just cause, and never consider labor arbitration decisions.

The onus of proof is on the employee to demonstrate that their dismissal was without just cause.

The 'balance of probabilities' standard means the court must be absolutely certain that the employee's breach occurred.

Health professionals are not reposed with a public trust.

If misconduct is not proven or does not meet the high threshold for just cause, the courts will reduce the notice period for an employee.

Under proportionality, a single incident of theft can never warrant summary dismissal.

Academic freedom offers academics total immunity from legal constraints applicable to their employment situation.

Procedural fairness in dismissals requires a timely investigation by an unbiased investigator before a termination decision is made.

During an investigation into employee misconduct, strict confidentiality must be maintained, preventing the interview of any witnesses.

An employer has a general duty to be unreasonable and untruthful when dealing with their employees.

An employer has to provide a solid foundation if they are going to allege cause.

Allegations can be made with a 'wait and see' approach to see if they stick.

If an allegation of misconduct is sustained, the sanction should be irrespective of employee circumstances.

If an employee admits to theft but tries to conceal material information, dismissal will not be upheld.

After-acquired knowledge about the employee has to be of similar reasons that caused the initial termination.

An employer may not justify termination without notice if they rely on subsequently ascertained cause.

Condonation occurs when an employer overlooks misconduct and fails to respond within a reasonable time.

Cumulative causes cannot justify dismissal without notice.

Wilful disobedience may justify dismissal only if related to finance.

Dishonesty undermines trust and the workplace relationship.

If workplace trust is broken, it is very easy to re-establish.

Dishonest misconduct always constitutes just cause for dismissal.

If you bully co-workers your freedom of speech protects you.

If an employee steels a $5.00 candy bar and has worked at the company 20 years it is unlikely they will be terminated.

If it cannot be proven that employee was dishonest, a separation cannot be provided.

A single act of insubordination can never provide just cause for termination.

If you are fired for insobordination, and you apologize, the old incident cannot be held against you.

Over the past decade there has been an expansion of the definition of the workplace.

Threatening behavior may result in dismissal.

General incompatibility is usually too vague to constitute just cause for termination without notice.

Conduct that takes place outside the workplace can result in termination.

Online activity cannot be the key issue to firing a worker.

Possession of child pornography may be just cause for dismissal.

Employers need not discipline only after a fair and thorough investigation.

An attorney who has sexually harrased someone can hide behind this client right to counsel.

Can social media get you fired, yes it can and post need to addressed in corporate documents.

One the implied duties that employee one their employers is the duty of dishonesty.

Culpable absenteeism occurs when employee must leave work.

In Canadian common law, an employee can be summarily dismissed, which means without advance notice or pay in lieu, only for just cause.

Under common law, "just cause" for dismissal merely indicates that the employer possessed a sound rationale, like downsizing, for terminating employment.

The determination of just cause is made definitively at the time the employer decides to terminate the employee, providing legal certainty.

An employer can improve its chances of successfully defending a wrongful dismissal claim by documenting support for the employee's ability to perform their job and using progressive discipline.

Courts strictly adhere to past wrongful dismissal lawsuits and completely disregard labor arbitration decisions when determining just cause.

As the consequence of a finding of just cause is inconsequential, the legal requirements surrounding the term are loosely formed.

The 'balance of probabilities' standard of proof necessitates absolute certainty in demonstrating a breach of employment contract.

The principle of proportionality dictates that the severity of the sanction must align with the severity of the employee’s misconduct.

Regardless of the severity, most performance-related incidents need to occur only once to constitute just cause for dismissal.

Academic freedom provides complete immunity from legal constraints applicable to employment situations, allowing academics to behave without consequence.

Procedural fairness mandates that there be investigation by an appropriately qualified and unbiased investigator AND that the investigation remain confidential.

An employer has no obligation to be honest, reasonable, and forthright with their employees in the process of terminations.

An employer is prevented from asserting just cause if they initially dismiss an employee without alleging it.

Subsequent acts of fraud will always justify dismissal, no matter the role or circumstance.

If an employer terminates for cause, they cannot provide any amount of money to the employee.

Condonation occurs when an employer, aware of employee misconduct, responds immediately, thus preserving their right to use that misconduct as grounds for termination.

There are a fixed and immutable set of principles pertaining to dismissal for just cause.

An employee can be terminated for cause while on sick leave.

Dishonesty in the workplace is considered only a minor issue, having little bearing on the employer-employee relationship.

The contextual approach lessens the importance of factors like length of service and work record in assessing employee's dishonest conduct.

Insolence and Insubordination almost always justify termination following a single incident.

A secret shopper call to schedule an appointment cannot qualify as gross insubordination.

No employer has the luxury to wait out events to see whether threatening words are coupled with an actual serious intent where insubordination is present.

Even a single instance of serious, threatening behavior will never be deemed worthy of carrying penalties for an employee.

General incompatibility is often a valid reason for just cause.

An employer cannot dismiss an employee for conduct that takes place outside the workplace.

An employee can use their work time to work at another job if they are busy or not.

Culpable absenteeism occurs when an employee is absent from work with a good reason.

Innocent absenteeism can trigger disciplinary measures.

Generally, it is up to a court of law to interpret if it is appropriate for termination based on someone being intoxicated at work.

Most employers already have the ability to deal with drugs, alcohol, intoxication, and prescription medications that may impact an employee's ability to safely perform their jobs, regardless of being a disability.

An employer can discipline an employee for substance abuse.

Because of advancements, there is a clear pathway in determining when an employee is incompetent.

An employer who has condoned an inadequate level of performance by his employee may later rely on any condoned behaviour as a ground for dismissal.

There are laws which guarantee a dismissal cannot proceed if an employee asserts certain workplace rights.

Despite clear, express warnings, a long-term employee's failure to exhibit professionalism can never prejudice the proper conduct of the employer’s business.

Dismissal based on a single instance of incompetence will never be sustained.

If the courts acknowledge the violation of the BC Human Rights Code and/or the AB Human Rights Act, the employer should expect the courts to mandate the dismissal.

Providing a clear, express warning of the potential consequences associated with the continued occurrence of clearly insubordinate behavior does not necessarily protect the organization and management from accountability.

Contextual considerations should not influence whether an action was premeditated or a momentary error in judgment.