Employer warned to stop intimidating former employee

Sent inappropriate letter to worker who found a new job in the same building

The Ontario Labour Relations Board has warned an employer to stop intimidating a former worker who quit, filed an action against the company and then found another job in the same building.

The board said Home Base Non-Profit Housing in Kingston, Ont., was out of line when it sent a letter to Carole Chafe on Feb. 17, 2005.

In that letter, Home Base said her former co-workers felt “a certain amount of antipathy” toward her and that it was “unfortunate” she was working in the same building. It asked her not to visit the Home Base offices or work areas if at all possible.

Chafe said Home Base had contacted her new employer and she felt her job was in jeopardy as a result. Chafe had filed a complaint after her employment with Home Base ended, claiming she had been constructively dismissed and her resignation arose out of workplace stress. That claim was denied.

The board said the tone and content of the Feb. 17 letter was “inappropriate.” The board reminded Home Base that s. 74 of Ontario’s Employment Standards Act prohibits an employer from intimidating or penalizing an employee who has brought a complaint under the act.

“Home Base Non-Profit Housing could be held liable for consequences to the applicant’s present employment that were linked to actions taken by (it) as a result of (Chafe) having filed a complaint,” the board said. “In other words, just because (Chafe) is working elsewhere does not mean (the employer) is free to criticize (her) or interfere in her new employment relationship.”

Chafe did not appeal the denial of her claim at the time it was refused, but decided to do so in the wake of the Feb. 17 letter. But the act requires any appeals to be filed within 30 days and she was about 60 days late. Therefore, the board rejected her appeal on the basis that it was late.

But it had a warning for Home Base: “In the unlikely event (it) does not heed the board’s warning about the consequences of any future conduct, (Chafe) could bring a fresh complaint alleging that she has suffered a reprisal as a result of having brought her initital complaint.”

For more information see:

•Chafe v. Home Base Non-Profit Housing, 2005 CarswellOnt 3565 (Ont. L.R.B.)

To read the full story, login below.

Not a subscriber?

Start your subscription today!