Relatives can be… annoying. Not all of them. And not all the time. But sometimes, when it comes to family you just want to cut the conversation short and move on with your day.
Full disclosure. I don’t feel this way about my family, of course. Though I’m definitely sure some of my kinfolk have similar feelings towards me at times.
But back to cutting conversations short. That’s what a cook at Burgers on Beechwood in Ottawa did via a Facebook message. On April 20, 2018, she sent a message out to recruit other chefs to help out at an event. She wrote: “Hey Peeps!! Looking for 3 cooks for May 19th One time gig more opportunities in the future for an event in Ottawa!”
A relative who saw the message popped her a note on Facebook that read: “Are you back in Canada?” To that, the cook responded: “Just for a bit.”
There were a couple of reasons she responded that way. First, she was pregnant (more on that later) and hadn’t told her relative that she was expecting or that she had returned to Ottawa after living abroad. Her “just for a bit” reply was meant to forestall any further questioning by the relative.
When her employer read that message on Facebook, it promptly fired her. Her boss explained the termination decision in response to a text message she sent when she asked why she wasn’t getting more hours. “Yes, unfortunately, we will not need you anymore. We hired a new cook as a casual and we understand that as per your Facebook you will be leaving after the baby is born so we had to take that decision. Best of luck.”
The cook testified that, as part of the hiring process, she explained that she was pregnant and needed to work sufficient hours to ensure she could qualify for EI maternity and parental leave benefits on the birth of her child. The employer had no issue with that and brought her on board.
After being canned, she filed a human rights complaint. After initially taking part in the proceeding, the employer stopped responding — never a good strategy. In this case, since the events described in the application and the cook’s testimony were consistent, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal said: “I find I must accept that the allegations as set out in the Application and the testimony reflects the events as they occurred.”
The Tribunal’s findings were clear: The cook’s pregnancy played a role in her dismissal, which constitutes discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The penalty? Nearly $40,000 consisting of: $7,499 for lost wages; $13,350 for lost EI maternity and parental leave benefits; and $15,000 for injury to her dignity, feelings, and self-respect.
This case is a classic example of why it’s crucial for employers to pause, gather all the facts, and engage in open communication before making decisions that could have life-altering consequences for their employees. The employer in this case never asked her about the message to get any context. They never bothered to inquire about her post-birth plans or if she was indeed going to leave Canada. They took the Facebook message, sent to a relative, at face value and called it a day.
All of this could have been avoided with a simple conversation in which the cook could have explained, simply, that she didn’t want to get into a lengthy conversation with a relative and shut it down by sending that note. Instead, her employer acted on a hunch.
Beyond the legal framework, this case should prompt us to reflect on our own practices and biases. Are we too quick to jump to conclusions? Do we make decisions based on assumptions rather than facts? Are we truly listening to our employees, or are we allowing our preconceptions to dictate our actions?
When it comes to making decisions that affect someone’s livelihood, it’s always better to get the full story before turning up the heat.
