Restaurant owner fired 20-year-old for rejecting his advances, then harassed her at her new place of work
A former waitress at a Vancouver restaurant has been awarded nearly $12,000 after her boss sexually harassed her and then further harassed her after she quit and filed a complaint with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.
Mary Clarke, 20, worked at Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats Ltd. in the summer of 2005. She was a shy person and her mother described her as having “an undiagnosed social anxiety condition.” She applied for a job at a new Frenchies location in late June 2005. During the initial interview, the restaurant’s owner, Michel Blais, 57, commented on what a pretty girl she was and asked her if she had a boyfriend. He also told Clarke she was “making him horny.” Though Clarke claimed this embarrassed her, her didn’t respond to Blais’ behaviour because of her shyness.
Clarke returned to the restaurant for a second interview. She characterized the interview as more of a 30 to 45 minute “personal conversation,” in which Blais discussed her boyfriend and told her she should break up with him because she was a “goodie good virgin.” She noted Blais referred to his waitresses as “his girls.” She testified she said very little, except that her boyfriend was a “really nice guy.” After the interview, Clarke didn’t tell her mother what had been said but she seemed not as open as she usually was to her.
Clarke was hired and worked eight shifts at Frenchies between June 30 and July 21, 2005. During this time, Blais had several conversations with her. Often, he suggested she should quit her two other jobs and told her he would guarantee her full-time hours. Most of the time, Clarke didn’t say much, except for once that she recalled where she refused to quit one of her jobs because she received good hours there.
Blais also frequently asked Clarke when she was going to leave her boyfriend and often commented on her physical appearance. Once, he told her he was big “down there” and that he “makes good love.” Clarke testified these remarks made her “uncomfortable, scared and embarrassed,” but again she would usually not respond.
On July 18, 2005, Blais asked Clarke to sit on his lap. Clarke told him to get his wife to do it and walked away. Blais reacted angrily and after the incident behaved in an unfriendly fashion towards her. A few days later, Blais told Clarke her work had gotten sloppy and it “wasn’t working out.” He told her to “go home and make love to your boyfriend.” After her termination, Clarke claimed she felt ashamed, confused and her self-confidence was shaken. After discussion with her mother and boyfriend, she filed her human rights complaint on Oct. 3, 2005, in the hope “the next girl” would be spared this treatment.
In September 2005, Clarke was transferred from one of her other jobs to a pizzeria a few doors down from Frenchies. After he was served with the sexual harassment complaint in December 2005, Blais came into the pizzeria when she was working and started “waving, pointing and smiling at her, and laughing hysterically,” according to Clarke. He returned a couple of days later and glared at her. Two months later, on Feb. 19, 2006, Blais came in again and asked another employee “Where’s the girl?”
After Blais’ Feb. 19 visit, Clarke and her mother called the police. A week later, the police warned Blais not to go into the pizzeria where Clarke worked. Blais became very angry and told them police and females that he had fired were out to get him. Blais responded with a complaint to the police on March 30, 2006, claiming Clarke and the owner of the pizza store were harassing and slandering him. He said the store owner pushed Clarke to file the complaint.
Clarke and Blais attended a settlement meeting, arranged by the human rights tribunal, in April 2006. Later the same day, as Clarke walked by Frenchies to go to work, Blais laughed and pointed at her. The police recommended to Clarke she avoid walking by the restaurant, which she usually did.
Blais had differing accounts of his conversations with Clarke, the interviews, and his visits to the pizzaria. He claimed when he fired her, all he said was he was sorry it didn’t work out and wished her good luck. He claimed he did not like firing people and it was the first time he had ever fired someone. Blais also testified he fired Clarke because she giggled too much at work, was not cleaning up properly and didn’t clean up milk after it was spilled. He claimed he had spoken to Clarke “three or four times” about her job performance. Clarke denied she had been given any warnings before her termination. The tribrunal preferred Clarke’s version of events over that of Blais.
“Ms. Clarke gave her evidence in a clear, straightforward and consistent manner. Mr. Blais, by contrast, was often vague, evasive, contradictory and argumentative in his testimony,” the tribunal said. “Any (performance) issues which arose were of a minor nature and of a kind to be expected with new staff in a new operation.”
The tribunal pointed out, by Blais’ own testimony, he went through 58 waitresses in one year at Frenchies.
The tribunal noted Blais’ behaviour in the restaurant and following the complaint had significant effects on Clarke. She coloured and cut her hair, dressed down and said she didn’t want “to look that pretty.” She did not sleep well and clearly “felt anxious and scared for her safety.”
The tribunal ruled Blais abused his power and his conduct at the restaurant was sexual harassment which affected her employment. He created “a sexualized and oppressive environment” for Clarke at the restaurant. Though she often didn’t respond because of her shyness, the tribunal felt Blais should have known his behaviour was inappropriate. The tribunal found Blais’ justification of sloppiness was not a legitimate reason for firing Clarke. Other waitresses had similar incidents without consequences, so it could only be inferred her termination was because of her refusal of Blais’ “inappropriate request that she sit on his lap, and in a manner which he was likely to find embarrassing.”
The tribunal ruled Blais’ conduct was an abuse of his power and he sexually harassed Clarke while she worked at Frenchies. Her termination was a result of her negative reaction to the harassment.
The tribunal also found Blais’ visits to the pizzeria were to intimidate her. There were several other options for him to get pizza, so it was not the only choice for him as he claimed. His complaint with the police was also found to be frivolous and was retaliation against Clarke. His actions after Clarke filed the initial sexual harassment complaint were aimed to “embarrass, humiliate and intimidate Ms. Clarke,” which the tribunal noted had the desired effect.
The tribunal awarded Clark $318 for lost wages and tips for the period after she was fired until she was able to pick up more work. Because she was young, vulnerable and Blais abused his position of power over her, Clarke was awarded $4,000 for injury to her dignity at work. For the campaign of intimidation after she no longer worked at Frenchies and the extreme effect it had on Clarke, the tribunal awarded $7,500 for further injury to dignity for total damages of $11,818.
For more information see:
• Clarke v. Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats and Blais (No. 2), 2007 BCHRT 153 (B.C. Human Rights Trib.).
Restaurant owner ‘preyed’ on vulnerability of young waitress
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal found Michel Blais’ treatment of a former waitress at his restaurant both during and after her employment to be harassment.
Blais, 57, made sexually suggestive comments towards Mary Clarke, 20, right from her first interview and through her one-month stint as a waitress at his Vancouver restaurant, Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats, in July 2005. Though his comments made Clarke uncomfortable, she usually didn’t say anything because she was extremely shy.
One day, Blais asked her to sit on his lap and Clarke finally confronted him. Blais reacted angrily and soon after he fired Clarke for what he claimed was her failure to maintain a level of cleanliness in the restaurant.
After Clarke filed a sexual harassment complaint, Blais started coming into her new place of work, often glaring, pointing and laughing at her. She felt humiliated, frightened and nervous, going so far as to change her appearance.
The tribunal found Blais’ conduct during Clarke’s employment was an abuse of his power.
“Mr. Blais preyed on Ms. Clarke’s vulnerability,” the tribunal said. “He sought to exercise control over her and heighten her vulnerability.”
It also ruled her firing was because of her reaction to his harassment, not a failure to do her job.
The tribunal also found Blais’ behaviour after she filed the complaint was designed to scare her and was also harassment.
“Mr. Blais’ conduct constituted a deliberate attempt to continue to intimidate Ms. Clarke, and was of a piece with his earlier retaliatory behaviour,” the tribunal said.
Clarke was awarded nearly $12,000 for injury to her dignity for both the harassment she experienced while working at Frenchies and Blais’ continued harassment afterwards.
Mary Clarke, 20, worked at Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats Ltd. in the summer of 2005. She was a shy person and her mother described her as having “an undiagnosed social anxiety condition.” She applied for a job at a new Frenchies location in late June 2005. During the initial interview, the restaurant’s owner, Michel Blais, 57, commented on what a pretty girl she was and asked her if she had a boyfriend. He also told Clarke she was “making him horny.” Though Clarke claimed this embarrassed her, her didn’t respond to Blais’ behaviour because of her shyness.
Clarke returned to the restaurant for a second interview. She characterized the interview as more of a 30 to 45 minute “personal conversation,” in which Blais discussed her boyfriend and told her she should break up with him because she was a “goodie good virgin.” She noted Blais referred to his waitresses as “his girls.” She testified she said very little, except that her boyfriend was a “really nice guy.” After the interview, Clarke didn’t tell her mother what had been said but she seemed not as open as she usually was to her.
Clarke was hired and worked eight shifts at Frenchies between June 30 and July 21, 2005. During this time, Blais had several conversations with her. Often, he suggested she should quit her two other jobs and told her he would guarantee her full-time hours. Most of the time, Clarke didn’t say much, except for once that she recalled where she refused to quit one of her jobs because she received good hours there.
Blais also frequently asked Clarke when she was going to leave her boyfriend and often commented on her physical appearance. Once, he told her he was big “down there” and that he “makes good love.” Clarke testified these remarks made her “uncomfortable, scared and embarrassed,” but again she would usually not respond.
On July 18, 2005, Blais asked Clarke to sit on his lap. Clarke told him to get his wife to do it and walked away. Blais reacted angrily and after the incident behaved in an unfriendly fashion towards her. A few days later, Blais told Clarke her work had gotten sloppy and it “wasn’t working out.” He told her to “go home and make love to your boyfriend.” After her termination, Clarke claimed she felt ashamed, confused and her self-confidence was shaken. After discussion with her mother and boyfriend, she filed her human rights complaint on Oct. 3, 2005, in the hope “the next girl” would be spared this treatment.
In September 2005, Clarke was transferred from one of her other jobs to a pizzeria a few doors down from Frenchies. After he was served with the sexual harassment complaint in December 2005, Blais came into the pizzeria when she was working and started “waving, pointing and smiling at her, and laughing hysterically,” according to Clarke. He returned a couple of days later and glared at her. Two months later, on Feb. 19, 2006, Blais came in again and asked another employee “Where’s the girl?”
After Blais’ Feb. 19 visit, Clarke and her mother called the police. A week later, the police warned Blais not to go into the pizzeria where Clarke worked. Blais became very angry and told them police and females that he had fired were out to get him. Blais responded with a complaint to the police on March 30, 2006, claiming Clarke and the owner of the pizza store were harassing and slandering him. He said the store owner pushed Clarke to file the complaint.
Clarke and Blais attended a settlement meeting, arranged by the human rights tribunal, in April 2006. Later the same day, as Clarke walked by Frenchies to go to work, Blais laughed and pointed at her. The police recommended to Clarke she avoid walking by the restaurant, which she usually did.
Blais had differing accounts of his conversations with Clarke, the interviews, and his visits to the pizzaria. He claimed when he fired her, all he said was he was sorry it didn’t work out and wished her good luck. He claimed he did not like firing people and it was the first time he had ever fired someone. Blais also testified he fired Clarke because she giggled too much at work, was not cleaning up properly and didn’t clean up milk after it was spilled. He claimed he had spoken to Clarke “three or four times” about her job performance. Clarke denied she had been given any warnings before her termination. The tribrunal preferred Clarke’s version of events over that of Blais.
“Ms. Clarke gave her evidence in a clear, straightforward and consistent manner. Mr. Blais, by contrast, was often vague, evasive, contradictory and argumentative in his testimony,” the tribunal said. “Any (performance) issues which arose were of a minor nature and of a kind to be expected with new staff in a new operation.”
The tribunal pointed out, by Blais’ own testimony, he went through 58 waitresses in one year at Frenchies.
The tribunal noted Blais’ behaviour in the restaurant and following the complaint had significant effects on Clarke. She coloured and cut her hair, dressed down and said she didn’t want “to look that pretty.” She did not sleep well and clearly “felt anxious and scared for her safety.”
The tribunal ruled Blais abused his power and his conduct at the restaurant was sexual harassment which affected her employment. He created “a sexualized and oppressive environment” for Clarke at the restaurant. Though she often didn’t respond because of her shyness, the tribunal felt Blais should have known his behaviour was inappropriate. The tribunal found Blais’ justification of sloppiness was not a legitimate reason for firing Clarke. Other waitresses had similar incidents without consequences, so it could only be inferred her termination was because of her refusal of Blais’ “inappropriate request that she sit on his lap, and in a manner which he was likely to find embarrassing.”
The tribunal ruled Blais’ conduct was an abuse of his power and he sexually harassed Clarke while she worked at Frenchies. Her termination was a result of her negative reaction to the harassment.
The tribunal also found Blais’ visits to the pizzeria were to intimidate her. There were several other options for him to get pizza, so it was not the only choice for him as he claimed. His complaint with the police was also found to be frivolous and was retaliation against Clarke. His actions after Clarke filed the initial sexual harassment complaint were aimed to “embarrass, humiliate and intimidate Ms. Clarke,” which the tribunal noted had the desired effect.
The tribunal awarded Clark $318 for lost wages and tips for the period after she was fired until she was able to pick up more work. Because she was young, vulnerable and Blais abused his position of power over her, Clarke was awarded $4,000 for injury to her dignity at work. For the campaign of intimidation after she no longer worked at Frenchies and the extreme effect it had on Clarke, the tribunal awarded $7,500 for further injury to dignity for total damages of $11,818.
For more information see:
• Clarke v. Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats and Blais (No. 2), 2007 BCHRT 153 (B.C. Human Rights Trib.).
Restaurant owner ‘preyed’ on vulnerability of young waitress
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal found Michel Blais’ treatment of a former waitress at his restaurant both during and after her employment to be harassment.
Blais, 57, made sexually suggestive comments towards Mary Clarke, 20, right from her first interview and through her one-month stint as a waitress at his Vancouver restaurant, Frenchies Montreal Smoked Meats, in July 2005. Though his comments made Clarke uncomfortable, she usually didn’t say anything because she was extremely shy.
One day, Blais asked her to sit on his lap and Clarke finally confronted him. Blais reacted angrily and soon after he fired Clarke for what he claimed was her failure to maintain a level of cleanliness in the restaurant.
After Clarke filed a sexual harassment complaint, Blais started coming into her new place of work, often glaring, pointing and laughing at her. She felt humiliated, frightened and nervous, going so far as to change her appearance.
The tribunal found Blais’ conduct during Clarke’s employment was an abuse of his power.
“Mr. Blais preyed on Ms. Clarke’s vulnerability,” the tribunal said. “He sought to exercise control over her and heighten her vulnerability.”
It also ruled her firing was because of her reaction to his harassment, not a failure to do her job.
The tribunal also found Blais’ behaviour after she filed the complaint was designed to scare her and was also harassment.
“Mr. Blais’ conduct constituted a deliberate attempt to continue to intimidate Ms. Clarke, and was of a piece with his earlier retaliatory behaviour,” the tribunal said.
Clarke was awarded nearly $12,000 for injury to her dignity for both the harassment she experienced while working at Frenchies and Blais’ continued harassment afterwards.
