Canadian Employment Law Today

Canadian Employment Law Today | 9 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2018 Cases and Trends in the incident with Brown. Worker upset by comments Brown was upset by the meeting and the suggestion that using the words "hun" and "sweetie-pie" could give male co-workers the wrong impression. She talked to a health and safety manager about it, and he re- sponded that he would look into it and let her know. She also talked to Proactive's field safety co-ordinator, who told her that her rights had been infringed and he would also look into it. However, Brown didn't hear from either of them and both left Proactive some time later. On Oct. 28, Brown sent a text message to Proactive's operations manager — it was normal practice for employees to commu- nicate by text message since they were often at different job sites — saying her last day with Proactive would be two months later, on Dec. 24, and she was going to "move for- ward" with the next stage of her life since she had been "standing still with my wage for a long time now." After a few more text mes- sages involving "happy face" emojis, Brown texted him that he was "a good man" and she was going to "miss you like crazy." e operations manager forwarded the text messages to the general manager on Nov. 2. Proactive decided to terminate Brown's employment sooner since it didn't want a departing employee who felt slighted to continue working for two months when she could become disengaged and unpro- ductive. e company terminated her on Nov. 4, providing two weeks' pay in lieu of notice. At the termination meeting on Nov. 4, the general manager first confirmed with Brown that she was resigning effective Dec. 24. After he informed her of her immedi- ate termination, Brown tried to raise other issues — including that she believed Proac- tive hadn't given her a fair chance — but the general manager didn't want to debate her at the meeting. Brown later claimed she said the incident and the Oct. 7 meeting about it were unac- ceptable and they terminated her after those comments, but Proactive management de- nied that was the case. She also claimed that she had invited the health and safety man- ager and field safety manager to the meeting, but they weren't there. e general manager argued he wasn't expecting them because he hadn't invited them himself. Brown filed a human rights complaint, claiming the comments said to her in the Oct. 7, 2016, meeting and the termination of her employment — she claimed she didn't formally notify the company of her intention to resign — constituted discrimination on the basis of her sex, contrary to the B.C. Hu- man Rights Code. e tribunal found that the instructions given to Brown to avoid using the terms "hun" and "sweetie-pie" to address co-work- ers were reasonable and not indicative of discrimination based on Brown's sex — the same instructions would likely apply to a male worker as well. In addition, the tribunal said the comment that Brown was a woman working "in a man's world" happened in the meeting and nowhere else, making it likely Proactive could establish the comment as an isolated incident. e tribunal also pointed out that the company fired the male co- worker who sexually harassed Brown. "While I appreciate that the superinten- dent's comments may have crossed the line, and may have been discouraging for Ms. Brown to hear, the company's decision to fire the offending employee spoke volumes in respect of sending a message that sexual harassment will not be tolerated at Proac- tive," said the tribunal. Termination decision not related to sex e tribunal also found that while Brown didn't formally notify Proactive of her inten- tion to resign, the company became aware when the operations manager forwarded her texts to the general manager and presi- dent. Proactive then made a business deci- sion to terminate Brown's employment be- cause it didn't want a potentially disengaged employee working there for two months. e evidence showed the decision to ter- minate was made before the Nov. 4 meet- ing at which Brown claimed she complained about discrimination and treatment, and Brown's sex was not a factor in the decision, the tribunal said. e tribunal determined Brown's dismiss- al wasn't related to any protected grounds under the B.C. Human Rights Code and dis- missed her complaint. For more information see: • Brown v. Proactive Hazmat & Environ- mental, 2018 CarswellBC 1686 (B.C. Hu- man Rights Trib.). Employee told manager she was leaving the employer in two months « from FIRING on page 3 CREDIT: IDN/SHUTTERSTOCK

• Cover