The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has awarded a former cook $37,849 after she was dismissed from her job shortly after announcing her pregnancy. The Tribunal found that the termination was linked to her pregnancy, contravening the Human Rights Code.
K.I., who was hired by Burgers on Beechwood, a restaurant owned by 2363327 Ontario Incorporated and its sole director R.P., had been working at the establishment for just over a week when she was abruptly fired. The Tribunal found that the reason for her termination stemmed from a Facebook exchange she had with a relative, which led her employer to mistakenly conclude that she was planning to leave her job after her baby was born.
K.I. testified that she had been upfront about her pregnancy during the hiring process in April 2018, and her need to accumulate enough hours to qualify for Employment Insurance (EI) maternity and parental leave benefits. She was assured that she would receive nearly full-time hours after a brief ramp-up period. However, after working only 28 hours in her first week, K.I. reached out to the owner to confirm her future schedule. His response was immediate and decisive: “Yes, unfortunately we will not need you anymore,” R.P. wrote, citing the need to replace her with another cook due to her expected departure after the baby’s birth.
The ruling notes that K.I. had never discussed her post-maternity leave plans with him or anyone else at the restaurant, and was shocked by the decision to terminate her employment. “I was shocked to learn that I had been fired,” K.I. testified, adding that she never suggested she would not return to work after her leave.
The employer, in its response to the application, claim the decision to fire her came after reading a Facebook exchange between K.I. and a relative on April 20, 2018. In it, K.I. said “Hey Peeps!! Looking for 3 cooks for May 19th. One time gig more opportunities in the future for an event in Ottawa!” The relative responded: “Are you back in Canada?” K.I. then wrote back: “Just for a bit.”
K.I. said she responded that way to forestall any further questions by her relative, and testified that nobody from her employer followed up with her about the Facebook message or its meaning before firing her.
R.P. and the corporate entity did not participate in the Tribunal process after initial submissions, and the Tribunal deemed them to have accepted all allegations presented by K.I. The Tribunal’s decision was therefore based on her testimony and the evidence she provided.
The Tribunal found that the termination was linked to her pregnancy, which constitutes discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code. According to the ruling, K.I.’s pregnancy “played at least some role in her dismissal,” a key factor in establishing a violation of the Code.
K.I. testified that the abrupt termination severely impacted her financial situation. Unable to find full-time work before giving birth in July 2018, she was ineligible for EI maternity and parental leave benefits, falling short of the required 600 insurable hours. As a result, she was forced to rely on personal savings and financial support from her family.
In its decision, the Tribunal awarded her $7,499 for lost wages, $15,350 for lost EI maternity and parental leave benefits, and $15,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect. The Tribunal noted that similar cases involving pregnancy-related termination have resulted in compensation within this range, citing the emotional and financial harm caused to her.
“The personal respondent’s conduct in this pregnancy-related termination and its impact upon the applicant warrants an award of $15,000 as compensation for her injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect,” the Tribunal stated in its ruling.
The Tribunal also found Primeau and 2363327 Ontario Incorporated jointly and severally liable for the damages, noting that R.P., as the owner and sole director of the company, was the “directing mind” behind the decision to terminate her employment. The Tribunal emphasized that employers must ensure their actions are free from discrimination, especially when it comes to vulnerable workers such as pregnant employees.
For more information, see Iskander v. 2363327 Ontario Incorporated, 2024 HRTO 1122 (CanLII).
