An Alberta court has ordered Northern Nursing Solutions to pay more than $75,000 in damages to a licensed practical nurse (LPN) who was recruited from New Brunswick, then subjected to delayed and partial wage payments before being terminated.
The ruling, issued by the Alberta Court of Justice, underscores the court’s scrutiny of employers’ good-faith obligations during a period marked by staffing shortages and strain within the health-care sector.
Justice J.L. Skitsko found that the defendant company failed to pay the plaintiff, identified here as T.R., in accordance with the terms of a “Master Employment Agreement” (MEA) dated Oct. 7, 2021. T.R. was drawn to Alberta during the COVID-19 crisis to serve as a specialized perioperative LPN at the Westlock Health Care Centre, having left secure employment in Moncton, N.B.
Relocation based on promises of stable compensation
According to the decision, T.R. relocated with her husband based on promises of stable compensation, including a $60 per hour rate, overtime pay, and allowances for accommodations, utilities, and travel.
The ruling set out key points of the employment agreement. According to Justice Skitsko, “The material terms of the MEA were as follows: … She was to be compensated at an hourly rate of $60 per hour and $90 per hour of overtime … payment to be issued on a biweekly basis amounting to an approximate annual salary of $128,945.” The agreement also included a $2,000 monthly reimbursement for accommodations and utilities, as well as a $0.40 per kilometre fuel reimbursement, up to $500 per assignment.
T.R. worked without issue from late 2021 through mid-2023, with invoices regularly submitted and paid. But problems arose in August 2023 when the defendant “stopped remitting payment … in a timely manner,” according to the reasons for judgment. The court noted that “some invoices were either not paid in full or at all,” and that the defendant offered “no adequate explanation” for the delays and shortfalls.
Unpaid invoices
Over the following months, T.R. made “many attempts to communicate with the Defendant” regarding unpaid or partially paid invoices. No satisfactory resolution was reached. Instead, T.R. was terminated on Dec. 1, 2023, effective Dec. 31, 2023, after raising her concerns with Alberta Health Services (AHS). The court accepted T.R.’s position that she had contacted AHS in hopes of prompting her employer to settle the outstanding wages. Justice Skitsko wrote, “Given that she had not received partial or any compensation for the amounts owing by this point, I do not see this fact as inconsistent with the employment relationship.”
Despite the termination letter’s assurance that payment would be forthcoming, Northern Nursing Solutions Inc. did not fully compensate T.R. for her earned wages or associated expenses. By the end of December, T.R. was owed approximately $30,000. Partial payments were made in early 2024, but $14,388 in wages remained outstanding at the time of judgment.
Following termination, T.R. secured part-time employment with the Westlock Health Care Centre at a lower hourly rate of $38 and without the living or accommodation allowances provided in her previous contract. The court noted that from January to June 2024, T.R. earned $47,156.29, mitigating some of her losses but still leaving a shortfall.
Calculating notice period
In determining the notice period and damages owed, Justice Skitsko considered standard factors such as age, tenure, the character of the employment, and the availability of comparable work, citing the landmark Bardal v Globe and Mail Ltd. decision. The court also took into account the inducement factor. T.R. had been recruited from secure employment in Moncton to relocate across the country, which the judge found to be a significant aggravating circumstance. As stated in the decision, “I accept that the circumstances of this inducement most certainly would justify an increase in the common law notice period.”
The court awarded T.R. six months’ notice in lieu of termination, minus the mitigation earnings she received from new employment. The judge calculated damages in lieu of dismissal at $30,843.51. This included her expected earnings and accommodation allowances, reduced by her subsequent part-time earnings. T.R. was also granted $14,388 for accrued but unpaid wages.
Aggravated damages
Additionally, Justice Skitsko awarded $30,000 in aggravated damages, citing what the court determined to be bad-faith conduct by the employer. Under the Supreme Court of Canada’s guidance in decisions such as Honda Canada Inc v Keays and Bhasin v Hrynew, the judge found that the defendant breached its duty of good faith by failing to pay T.R. on time, ignoring her communications, and misrepresenting the likelihood of overdue wages being settled. The court accepted T.R.’s evidence of the stress and anxiety caused by months of non-payment, and the further impact on her family and financial obligations.
Justice Skitsko stated, “Without hesitation, I accept the evidence of the Plaintiff in this regard,” adding that the defendant’s conduct was “deplorable” and “without question a breach of the duty of good faith.” The judge referenced C.M. Callow Inc. v Zollinger to support the finding that a party has a duty to correct a known misapprehension caused by its own misleading conduct. Northern Nursing Solutions Inc. provided a termination letter on Dec. 1, 2023, “which expressly indicated she would get paid upon submission of her invoices.” The court found that this perpetuated a misapprehension and further breached good-faith obligations.
Punitive damages
In declining to award punitive damages, the judge noted that while the defendant’s conduct was in bad faith, punitive damages require a separate, independent actionable wrong at a level that “offends a court’s sense of decency.” In this case, the court concluded that the substantial compensatory and aggravated awards were sufficient to address the defendant’s behaviour and meet the objectives of deterrence and denunciation.
The final breakdown of the award to T.R. totalled $75,231.51, comprising $30,843.51 for damages in lieu of notice, $14,388 in unpaid wages, and $30,000 in aggravated damages. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest were also granted, with interest calculated from specified dates in 2023 and 2024. The court further allowed double costs under column four of the Court of Justice Tariff of Fees and triple costs for the plaintiff’s written argument, totalling $5,500 in costs.
Throughout, Justice Skitsko returned to the principle that an employer must act in good faith and fulfil its contractual wage obligations. The decision underlines the importance of prompt and honest communication, fair dealing, and transparent payment practices. As stated in the reasons for judgment, “There can be no doubt that an employer has a duty of good faith to their employees,” and in this matter, that duty was not met.
For more information, see Rosenberg v Northern Nursing Solutions Inc., 2024 ABCJ 220 (CanLII).
