2,734
edits
Difference between revisions of "Employment Law Issues (9:V)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Employment Law Issues (9:V) (view source)
Revision as of 21:13, 27 September 2022
, 21:13, 27 September 2022→b) Poor Employee Performance
| Line 734: | Line 734: | ||
Where there is actual incompetence, not just dissatisfaction with an employee’s work, the employee may be dismissed with cause if such incompetence is the fault of the employee (''Waite v La Ronge Childcare Co-operative'' (l985), 40 Sask R 260 (QB)). If an employee presents an exaggerated assessment of their own skills, a company is justified in dismissing that employee after finding out their true abilities (''Manners v Fraser Surrey Docks Ltd'' (1981), 9 ACWS (2d) 155). Incompetence is assessed using an objective standard of performance, and it is for the employer to prove that the employee fell below the standard. Usually, one isolated example of failure to meet such a test does not warrant discharge (''Clark v Capp (1905)'', 9 OLR 192). The employer must prove that: | Where there is actual incompetence, not just dissatisfaction with an employee’s work, the employee may be dismissed with cause if such incompetence is the fault of the employee (''Waite v La Ronge Childcare Co-operative'' (l985), 40 Sask R 260 (QB)). If an employee presents an exaggerated assessment of their own skills, a company is justified in dismissing that employee after finding out their true abilities (''Manners v Fraser Surrey Docks Ltd'' (1981), 9 ACWS (2d) 155). Incompetence is assessed using an objective standard of performance, and it is for the employer to prove that the employee fell below the standard. Usually, one isolated example of failure to meet such a test does not warrant discharge (''Clark v Capp (1905)'', 9 OLR 192). The employer must prove that: | ||
:a) reasonable standards of behaviour and performance were set and clearly communicated to the employee; | |||
:b) the employee was notified when they did not meet those standards; | |||
:c) the employee received training and was allowed adequate time to meet those standards; and | |||
:d) the possible repercussions of failing to meet those standards were clearly communicated. | |||
Just cause for termination exists when an employee fails to respond to these measures. However, the ESB and courts require that the employer prove that all these steps were taken. There is also a requirement that the employee appreciates the significance of the warning (''Korber v Can West Imports Limited and Satten'', [1984] BCWLD 737). See ''Hennessy v Excell Railing Systems Ltd.'' (2005 BCSC 734), for a comprehensive list of what an employer must show to establish poor performance. | Just cause for termination exists when an employee fails to respond to these measures. However, the ESB and courts require that the employer prove that all these steps were taken. There is also a requirement that the employee appreciates the significance of the warning (''Korber v Can West Imports Limited and Satten'', [1984] BCWLD 737). See ''Hennessy v Excell Railing Systems Ltd.'' (2005 BCSC 734), for a comprehensive list of what an employer must show to establish poor performance. | ||
Incompetence as grounds for dismissal needs to be considered in light of the ''Human Rights Code'' and the ''bona fide'' occupational requirement (“BFOR”) test (see ''British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v British Columbia Government and Service Employees’ Union'' (BCGSEU), [1999] 3 SCR 3). In a case of poor employee performance, the ESB will not find just cause for dismissal unless the employer can demonstrate a “neglect of duties”. | Incompetence as grounds for dismissal needs to be considered in light of the ''Human Rights Code'' and the ''bona fide'' occupational requirement (“BFOR”) test (see ''British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v British Columbia Government and Service Employees’ Union'' (BCGSEU), [1999] 3 SCR 3). In a case of poor employee performance, the ESB will not find just cause for dismissal unless the employer can demonstrate a “neglect of duties”. | ||
==== c) Dishonesty ==== | ==== c) Dishonesty ==== | ||