Skip to content

The Latest in Employment Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Good faith expected of employers!

Brian G. Johnston, QC

While the concept of good faith is not new to employment law, its limits and implications remain uncertain. In a recent decision, Avalon Ford v Evans 2017 NLCA 9, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal has clarified the expectation that employers act in good faith.

Evans had been employed by Avalon for more than 12 years when he was reprimanded for a shipment error. As a result, he suffered a severe stress reaction and told his boss that he was “done”, handed over his work cellphone and keys and left the dealership. Avalon was not pleased. When Evans returned to submit a disability insurance claim with a stress diagnosis, Avalon refused to accept the medical diagnosis or accommodate his return to modified work duties. In fact, the employer tore up the medical note tendered by Evans. Evans sued, alleging that he had either been constructively dismissed or held to a resignation he did not mean. The trial judge appeared to conflate these arguments and found that Evans had been constructively dismissed because the employer breached its good faith duty.

Importantly, though it dismissed the appeal, the Court of Appeal said there was no freestanding duty of good faith, and that bad faith did not give rise to a cause of action separate from an action for wrongful dismissal.

However, the Court did find that good faith could be used as an “organizing principle” and be relied upon to imply specific duties and to evaluate how the parties’ actions fit into existing doctrines.

For example, an employer accepting a genuine resignation would not entitle the employee to damages; however, the mutual obligation of good faith might reasonably lead the employer to offer the employee some time to reconsider the resignation.

In Avalon, the Court applied the duty of good faith when it considered whether it was reasonable for the employer to have concluded that Evans had resigned. Looking at the context of the relationship, the Court decided that it was not reasonable for Avalon to conclude from Evans’ emotional outburst that a resignation had occurred.

The concept of good faith and employment has been around for a while. In 1997 the Supreme Court of Canada said in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701, that employers have a duty of good faith when dismissing employees. Without giving a precise definition, the Court explained that good faith meant at least being candid, reasonable, honest and forthright and not being untruthful, misleading or unduly insensitive.

A decade later, in Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays, 2008 SCC 39, the Supreme Court of Canada gave examples of bad faith behaviours, e.g. attacking an employee’s reputation by making declarations at the time of dismissal, misrepresenting the reason for dismissal or dismissing employees so as to deprive them of pension benefits or other rights.

More recently, the Supreme Court of Canada considered the role of good faith broadly in the context of all contract law (Bhasin v. Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71), where good faith was recognized as an “organizing principle” of contract law whereby “parties generally must perform their contractual duties honestly and reasonably and not capriciously or arbitrarily. Parties must not lie or otherwise knowingly mislead each other about matters directly linked to the performance of a contract.”

The Supreme Court of Canada applied Bhasin directly to employment law in Potter v New Brunswick Legal Aid Commission, 2015 SCC 10, where it found that putting an employee on an indefinite paid suspension without reasons was not good faith because it lacked forthrightness.

Since then, the expectation of good faith has even been applied to pre-employment negotiations (Antunes v Limen Structures, 2015 ONSC 2163).

Finally, in Joshi v National Bank of Canada, 2016 ONSC 3510, the Court suggested the possibility of an implied contractual obligation to afford employees who are the subject of a misconduct investigation an opportunity to respond or refute the allegations.

While good faith, or lack thereof, has been a theme of employment law cases for decades, the Supreme Court’s decision in Bhasin has broadened its application. Looking at Avalon, we can expect that courts will be looking at the employment relationship through a prism of good faith from start to finish.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


Generic filters

 
 

Nova Scotia unveils changes to financial hardship unlocking – financial institutions to receive applications starting July 1, 2021

June 11, 2021

Dante Manna with the assistance of Kali Robertson (summer student) The Nova Scotia Government recently released regulations reassigning the authority for administering financial hardship unlocking in the province. Effective July 1, 2021, individuals will apply directly…

Read More

Reuniting with family: who can come to Canada despite COVID-19 restrictions?

June 10, 2021

Brittany Trafford The Canadian borders have been restricted for over a year now and many families have struggled with being separated. Throughout 2020 and early 2021 restrictions have fluctuated as the federal government tried to…

Read More

Unifor Local 64 v Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited: citing statutory duty to provide safe workplace as justification to demand drug test

June 7, 2021

Harold Smith, QC with the assistance of Matthew Raske (summer student) A recent labour arbitration decision, Unifor Local 64 and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited, shows how the permissibility of drug and alcohol testing continues…

Read More

Planning for re-opening: what might an international border opening look like in Canada?

June 2, 2021

Brittany Trafford Last week the Maritime provinces announced various re-opening plans based on vaccine trajectories, with Newfoundland and Labrador making an announcement today¹. These plans address, among other things, who will be able to enter…

Read More

COVID-19 immigration update

May 31, 2021

*Last updated: May 31, 2021 (Originally published April 1, 2020) Kathleen Leighton Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there are various implications for the immigration world, including for those already in Canada, as well as those…

Read More

Nova Scotia unveils reopening plan

May 28, 2021

Katharine Mack Premier Ian Rankin and Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Robert Strang provided details on Nova Scotia’s reopening plan this afternoon. The Province’s plan has a total of 5 phases. Phase 1, which focuses…

Read More

Khan v. CBC – the expanding role of privacy law in labour arbitrations

May 27, 2021

Chad Sullivan A recent labour arbitration decision (Canadian Broadcasting Corp. and Canadian Media Guild (Khan), Re, 2021 CanLII 761) provides another example of how privacy law continues to evolve and can directly impact the outcome…

Read More

The Retail Payment Activities Act: the federal government’s proposed regulation of retail payments for FinTech

May 27, 2021

Kevin Landry and Annelise Harnanan (summer student) In April 2021, the federal government introduced the draft Retail Payments Activities Act (“RPAA”) as part of Bill C-30, the Act to implement the 2021 federal budget. Under…

Read More

New Brunswick regulator seeks input on revised proposed rule under Unclaimed Property Act

May 25, 2021

Christopher Marr, TEP and Level Chan with the assistance of Annelise Harnanan (summer student) On May 20, 2021, the New Brunswick Financial and Consumer Services Commission (“FCNB”) released a revised version of one of its…

Read More

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal unwilling to affirm Charter right to testamentary freedom

May 21, 2021

Jennifer Taylor and Bhreagh Ross   The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal has overturned a decision that found a Charter right to testamentary freedom. Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v Lawen Estate¹ involved an appeal by…

Read More

Search Archive


Generic filters

Scroll To Top