If you have been terminated, often, the first thing you need to decide is whether to accept the termination package presented by your former employer. Some employees are not even aware that they are making this decision by signing their termination letter. Employers will take advantage of this by insisting an employee needs to sign to get anything or claiming that this is the maximum owed under the employment contract.[1]
As with everything to do with your employment, the best thing you can do to protect yourself is speak to an employment lawyer before doing anything. The case of Wilds v. 1959612 Ontario Inc. illustrates why getting legal advice is the best investment you can make.
The Case at a Glance
Barbara Wilds, an executive assistant, was terminated after a short tenure with Gibson Building Supplies. After she refused to sign the termination letter, Gibson failed to pay her entitlements under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), ignored her requests for a reference letter, and left valid business expenses unpaid. Despite the repeated demands from both her and her lawyer that the company obey the law, Gibson only offered minimal severance payments, contingent on her signing a full and final release. Due to this, Ms. Wilds was forced to take legal action to enforce her rights.
Despite Ms. Wilds losing at trial on both the notice period sought and claims for damages for mental distress, she was able to go from being offered $3,773.08 to being awarded $19,923.85, plus interest, a five-fold increase of the amounts payable due to her termination. She was also awarded $6,000.00 in costs.[2] The Court’s decisions highlight how favourable the law is towards employees.
- Your Termination Clause is Almost Certainly Unenforceable
- Ms. Wilds’ employment contract contained “termination without cause” and “termination with cause” provisions, but both violated the ESA and were deemed unenforceable. The “termination with cause” clause allowed Gibson to dismiss employees for reasons falling below the ESA’s standard. Because these provisions did not meet legal standards, the Court awarded Ms. Wilds two (2) months of pay in lieu of notice.
- Compliance with the ESA is Not Optional
- Employees’ Right to Basic Entitlements: At a minimum, every employee is owed their statutory entitlements on termination, including accrued vacation pay, reimbursements, and reasonable notice. By refusing to pay Ms. Wilds her due entitlements, Gibson violated the ESA, leading to an additional award of damages.
- Business Expenses Must be Paid
- Business Expenses Must Be Reimbursed: Ms. Wilds incurred work-related expenses approved by Gibson, but these went unpaid, even after multiple requests made by her and her lawyer. Employers must reimburse approved expenses, even after an employee has been let go. This decision reinforces that employees are entitled to get back what they spent on work-related expenses, no matter the timing of their termination.
- No Reference Letter = A Bad Day for an Employer in Court
- Reference Letters Are Important: A reference letter can be crucial in finding new employment. Ms. Wilds requested a reference letter to assist in her job search, but Gibson refused, even during litigation. This decision backfired on Gibson, as the Court noted the refusal negatively affected Ms. Wilds’ job search efforts.
- Employers Will be Punished for Bad Faith Conduct
- Don’t “Play Hardball”: Gibson’s failure to meet its statutory obligations and refusal to provide basic documentation—like a reference letter—was an unnecessarily harsh approach that ultimately cost them. The Court awarded punitive damages for Gibson’s marked departure from ordinary standards of decent behaviour. This sends a strong message: Courts look unfavourably at employers who fail to comply with the law and their duties.
What Now? Tips for Employees
This case provides some practical takeaways for employees dealing with employment issues:
- Employment Law is Technical: As shown in the decision, employment law is an area of law where the exact phrasing of a document can be the difference between $4,000 and $20,000. You need a properly qualified human being who can understand the law and advise you on these types of documents. An online calculator could have easily undervalued the case by 50% by not including possible awards for bad faith.
- Save Everything: If a document could be relevant later for your employment, save both a hard copy and a digital copy. In this case, the total 407 expenses were $46.93. With low amounts, there is a temptation not to bother including them in the claim. Ms. Wilds chose to claim them, and by saving her 407 ETR receipts, she was able to get paid for them.
- When You Are Right, You Still Need to Fight: Gibson admitted that Ms. Wilds was entitled to be paid amounts under the ESA and expense reimbursement and that these amounts had not been paid due to a clerical error. It then continued to not pay Ms. Wilds. This is why you need someone who can enforce your rights in Court – a lawyer.
Protecting Your Rights After Termination
The Wilds v. 1959612 Ontario Inc. decision is a reminder that the Courts protect employees’ rights and punish employers who act unreasonably or in bad faith. It is also a reminder that if you’ve been terminated, talk to a lawyer. Ms. Wilds chose to do so and, despite losing on various aspects at trial, still was awarded almost $20,000 plus $6,000 for costs. While this is only an example of one case, and your case may be different, it shows the value that talking to a lawyer can provide.
Facing Unfair Treatment? Contact Us. Job loss is difficult enough without unnecessary obstacles. If you’re struggling with an employer who isn’t following the law or have questions about your termination or employment contract, our team can help you secure the fair treatment and compensation you deserve. Don’t let an employer’s “hardball” tactics go unchallenged—reach out today to learn about your rights.