Michaud v. RBC Dominion Securities Inc. (2002). 118 A.C.W.S. (3d) 394 (B.C.C.A.)
At issue in this appeal was whether Michaud’s failure to mitigate his losses by working out the notice period for RBC properly resulted in a reduction of his damages for wrongful dismissal.
Michaud was employed as a regional manager with RBC for 19 years before his position was eliminated. RBC offered to employ him as vice-president and manager and to continue his salary as regional manager for two years.
Michaud refused the proposal despite RBC’s attempts to persuade him to reconsider. At trial the court held there had been an express dismissal or, alternatively, a constructive dismissal of Michaud. A reasonable notice period was held to be 15 months. The court also held Michaud had not fulfilled his duty to mitigate by refusing to continue working for RBC until he could find suitable replacement employment.
The court said the duty to mitigate does not require an employee to continue to work “in an atmosphere of hostility, embarrassment or humiliation.”
But where an employer continues to offer a position to the employee after he has accepted the termination, the employee may be obligated to take the position at least temporarily while he searches for another job. In most cases this will not be possible because the relationship will have become so strained it would not be reasonable to expect them to continue to work together.
But the appeal court held in this case it was unreasonable for Campbell not to work out the notice period with RBC in order to mitigate his damages.
The relationship between the parties was cordial, there was no allegation of cause by the employer and Michaud was valued as an employee. The fact Michaud had started legal action against RBC did not make it unreasonable to expect him to continue on as an employee. The duty to mitigate by continuing to work is not eliminated simply because the employee has started litigation.
Michaud should have mitigated his losses by continuing to work for RBC and, therefore, no damages were owing.
At issue in this appeal was whether Michaud’s failure to mitigate his losses by working out the notice period for RBC properly resulted in a reduction of his damages for wrongful dismissal.
Michaud was employed as a regional manager with RBC for 19 years before his position was eliminated. RBC offered to employ him as vice-president and manager and to continue his salary as regional manager for two years.
Michaud refused the proposal despite RBC’s attempts to persuade him to reconsider. At trial the court held there had been an express dismissal or, alternatively, a constructive dismissal of Michaud. A reasonable notice period was held to be 15 months. The court also held Michaud had not fulfilled his duty to mitigate by refusing to continue working for RBC until he could find suitable replacement employment.
The court said the duty to mitigate does not require an employee to continue to work “in an atmosphere of hostility, embarrassment or humiliation.”
But where an employer continues to offer a position to the employee after he has accepted the termination, the employee may be obligated to take the position at least temporarily while he searches for another job. In most cases this will not be possible because the relationship will have become so strained it would not be reasonable to expect them to continue to work together.
But the appeal court held in this case it was unreasonable for Campbell not to work out the notice period with RBC in order to mitigate his damages.
The relationship between the parties was cordial, there was no allegation of cause by the employer and Michaud was valued as an employee. The fact Michaud had started legal action against RBC did not make it unreasonable to expect him to continue on as an employee. The duty to mitigate by continuing to work is not eliminated simply because the employee has started litigation.
Michaud should have mitigated his losses by continuing to work for RBC and, therefore, no damages were owing.
