The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Is Telling Your Boss to F*@% Off Cause for Dismissal: Part Deux

by David Doorey May 20, 2010
written by David Doorey May 20, 2010

Earlier this week, I described a case in which a court ruled that an employee who cursed at her employer could not be dismissed for cause, but was entitled to reasonable notice of the termination.  That was an example of how a court in a non-union setting deals with the issue of cause under the common law mode.  The question in the non-union setting is whether the employee’s belligerence is serious enough to warrant the employer dismissing the employee without the usual requirement under the common law to give notice.  The employee “won” in that case, which meant that the employer was ordered to pay her damages for “reasonable notice”.  She did not get her job back.
How about in a unionized setting?  There, the rules are different.  A unionized employer cannot dismiss an employee by simply giving them notice.  Rather, unionized employers must have “just cause” to dismiss an employee, in other words, a reason and a pretty good one.  And courts don’t decide if an employer has just cause, labour arbitrators do.
So, consider an arbitration award in a case called Smurfit-MBI and the Independent Paperworkers, in which a unionized employee was dismissed for giving his supervisor “the finger”.  The arbitrator ruled that the “finger” means F-off in our culture.   The employee had worked for the employer for about 7 years, but already had 7 prior incidents of discipline, including 4 one-day suspensions, and 1 three day suspension, mostly for poor performance but also for being belligerent to a supervisor.
However, despite that dismal record, the arbitrator ruled that the employer did not have just cause for dismissal.  The arbitrator found that the employee was in a bad mood because his dog was sick, and that he “just wanted to left alone”:

…the evidence leads to the conclusion that he simply wanted to be left alone, not that he intended any insubordination. In this regard, I view his actions as impulsive and not premeditated insubordination. In these circumstances, it is possible to understand why the grievor acted in such an inappropriate manner. While some discipline is warranted, the ultimate penalty of discharge would be too harsh in this situation.  His misconduct is serious and does amount to disturbing behaviour.  But it was also a momentary gesture instigated by both personal emotions and job frustration.  The frustration is no excuse for his actions, but his emotional state and the short nature of the incident diminish the seriousness of the situation.  There is nothing in the evidence to suggest that he was threatening or attacking the authority of his supervisor. Therefore, this is an appropriate case to exercise my discretion and reinstate the Grievor on terms and conditions.

Note then that the reasoning in this case is similar to that in the non-union case I discussed in the earlier post.  In  both cases, the decision-maker found that the employee’s conduct was a spontaneous outburst owing to the fact that the employee was in a foul mood.
But note too that there is a big difference in the two outcomes.  The non-union employee loses her job but gets some cash in lieu of the notice she should have received.  The unionized employee gets his job back, albeit with a 2.5 month unpaid suspension substituted.  Courts do not reinstate employees, even when the employer had no cause to dismiss the employee.  Arbitrators can, and often do, reinstate unionized employees when the employer does not have “just cause” to dismiss.
Do you think it is fair that non-union employees receive less job protection than unionized employees?  Should governments pass laws (like we have in the Federal jurisdiction) requiring employers to have a good reason to dismiss an employee and allowing adjudicators to reinstate wrongfully dismissed employees?

0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Is Telling Your Boss to "F#@& Off" Cause for Dismissal?
next post
Locked Out Sears Workers Take to You-Tube in Fight with Sears

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 338 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦Follow

Law Prof. Talking #labor & #employment #law #Gig to the masses. Alpaca ❤️ @YorkUniversity @OsgoodeNews @LSELaw @LWPHarvard @Jacobin @OnLaborBlog https://t.co/5V9r8VPHsh

David J. Doorey🇨🇦
Retweet on TwitterDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦 Retweeted
jamesbrad263Brad James@jamesbrad263·
8h

@TheLawofWork @OFLabour Thanks for giving me space on your blog last December to bloviate and whine about this broad topic: https://lawofwork.ca/james_whysoquiet/

Reply on Twitter 1559880762480070657Retweet on Twitter 15598807624800706571Like on Twitter 1559880762480070657Twitter 1559880762480070657
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
9h

It is rather striking that the @OFLabour is not leading a charge for improved access to collective bargaining.

Emphasizing improved labor standards over collective bargaining rights.

Brad James@jamesbrad263

Private sector union membership is slipping. Ways to address that could include better rights for employees to form unions (as BC has done) or building a broader-based bargaining system for franchise workers. But those aren't in this list of goals from Ontario's union federation. https://twitter.com/OFLabour/status/1559242326391791616

Reply on Twitter 1559872838995218437Retweet on Twitter 1559872838995218437Like on Twitter 15598728389952184374Twitter 1559872838995218437
Retweet on TwitterDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦 Retweeted
greenhousenytSteven Greenhouse@greenhousenyt·
23h

Breaking- NLRB says workers at Amazon warehouse in Albany NY area file petition for union election for 400 workers to join Amazon Labor Union

Reply on Twitter 1559661375890268163Retweet on Twitter 1559661375890268163181Like on Twitter 1559661375890268163953Twitter 1559661375890268163
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.