Dismissal not made for good and sufficient cause

Examples

Discharge (Dismissal) vs. permanent layoff

Sophie has held the same job for 5 years. Her employer lays her off permanently under the pretext that he is facing economic difficulties. Two weeks later, she learns that he hired another person to perform the exact same tasks at the same wage.

This case involves a dismissal not made for good and sufficient cause. The employer cannot invoke a permanent layoff for economic reasons, since he replaced Sophie.

Constructive dismissal

Patrick has worked as a mechanic with a schedule of 40 hours per week for 10 years. He has always worked full time from Monday to Friday, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at an hourly rate of $16. His employer informs him that henceforth he will work 20 hours a week from Monday to Friday, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. at an hourly rate of $10. Patrick has the impression that he is being dismissed since nothing suggests that the enterprise is experiencing economic difficulties.

This case could involve a constructive dismissal. The changes are substantial and could force Patrick to quit his job to find conditions of employment that are equivalent to those which he enjoyed before.

Double sanction

Carl has worked as a plant storekeeper for 10 years. His employer blames him for making an error when placing an order and suspends him for 5 days. This is the first time that Carl has ever been blamed for doing something wrong and that he has been the subject of a disciplinary measure. During his suspension, Carl receives a registered letter notifying him of his dismissal.

This is a double sanction and, as result, constitutes a dismissal not made for good and sufficient cause since the employer first suspended Carl then fired him for the same error.

Anne has been a representative for a cosmetics company for 5 years. At a meeting, her employer informs Anne that she is being suspended while an investigation is carried out into allegations of theft. The results of the investigation lead to the conclusion that Anne had indeed committed theft. Her employer meets with her again to dismiss her.

This dismissal is justified and does not involve a double sanction, since the employer awaited the results of the investigation before deciding on Anne’s fate.
Maxime has worked for the same enterprise for 3 years. His employer, facing serious economic difficulties, has had to make several layoffs. Maxime is laid off permanently with all of his colleagues having the same number of years of uninterrupted service.

While this layoff is unfortunate, it is legal. The employer is experiencing real economic difficulties and Maxime is not the only person to lose his job.
Claudie has been a secretary-receptionist for 4 years. She has always worked 40 hours a week, namely 36 hours during the day and 4 hours one evening a week. Due to a decline in business, her employer decides to no longer open in the evening. As a result, he makes changes to Claudie’s schedule, which drops to 36 hours a week. Claudie claims that this is a case of constructive dismissal.

This case does not constitute a constructive dismissal since no major changes were made to Claudie’s conditions of employment.