How effectively does your company record disciplinary conversations with employees? A recent Alberta decision highlights just how important this can be for employers.
In McDonald v Sproule Management GP Limited, Justice Marion of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench writes a detailed decision considering the appropriateness of granting summary judgment – which is a decision in favour of the plaintiff without a trial – in a wrongful dismissal case.
The case involved a senior accounting executive, Kevin McDonald (“McDonald”), whose employment was terminated by Sproule Management GP Limited (“Sproule”) for just cause in February 2016. McDonald alleged that the termination was wrongful and that he was entitled to significant severance pay.
Summary judgment granted
In response to an application by McDonald to decide the case in his favour without a trial, Justice Marion considered the arguments by both sides and conducted a thorough review of the court record to date, which included several affidavits and a transcript of a lengthy questioning of McDonald on his affidavit. Justice Marion concluded that the record was sufficient for him to grant summary judgment.
Although the assumed and undisputed record supported the fact that McDonald’s objective performance and conduct were becoming serious, Justice Marion also noted that Sproule’s performance record displayed serious shortcomings in Sproule’s communication and conduct toward McDonald, including the fact that Sproule failed to warn McDonald about his conduct on several occasions. Justice Marion concluded that there was no merit to Sproule’s just cause defence, and that Sproule had not established a genuine issue requiring a trial. Justice Marion awarded McDonald 18 months’ pay in lieu of notice.
Lessons for employers
There are two key takeaways for employers from this Alberta decision.
The first is that, even in a case involving an allegation of just cause for termination with a significant record and substantial evidence, the Court may still determine that a summary judgment application is appropriate to fully determine a claim.
The second related takeaway for employers is the importance of clearly and consistently communicating expectations and potential consequences to employees when poor performance or behaviour arises. Despite the many instances of poor performance and inappropriate behaviour on McDonald’s part, Sproule issued no warnings with respect to the behaviour nor did the company highlight to McDonald the consequences if he continued the behaviour. This case may have been decided differently had the employer kept a careful record of all disciplinary efforts.
Our labour and employment team would be pleased to assist employers navigate through disciplinary issues and terminations. Contact us to learn how we can help.
Note: This article is of a general nature only and is not exhaustive of all possible legal rights or remedies. In addition, laws may change over time and should be interpreted only in the context of particular circumstances such that these materials are not intended to be relied upon or taken as legal advice or opinion. Readers should consult a legal professional for specific advice in any particular situation.