An Alberta Court of Justice has ruled that WestJet wrongfully dismissed an accountant who refused to comply with the company’s COVID-19 vaccination policy after her religious exemption request was denied.
The court awarded D.Y., a former Accountant II-Operations Accounting, damages equivalent to an 11-month notice period worth $65,587.72, rejecting the airline’s assertion that it had just cause for termination.
Religious exemption request denied despite sincere beliefs
D.Y. worked for WestJet for 11 years before her employment was terminated for cause on December 1, 2021, after she failed to comply with the company’s COVID-19 Vaccination Policy. Prior to termination, she had applied for a religious exemption.
In her accommodation request form submitted on September 20, 2021, D.Y. stated she was a practicing Christian for over three years and that her faith prevented her from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.
“Based on sincerely held beliefs as a bible believing Christian, the vaccine is betrayal of faith to my healer, Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” she wrote, adding, “Jesus is my healer, I do not cannot rely on the use of vaccinations or medicines created artificially in order to prevent sickness.”
D.Y. included a letter from her pastor confirming her “deeply held religious objection to medical interventions” and stating that she had “faith that her Savior, Jesus Christ is her ultimate healing power and as such, consider the acceptance of vaccines, or testing on a healthy body as a betrayal of faith.”
However, WestJet denied her request on October 4, 2021, stating in its denial letter that “the information you provided to WestJet casts doubt on religion being the grounds for your application. You have written in your application form that you consider the vaccine unsafe. It is therefore reasonable to consider that you are philosophically/personally opposed to mandatory vaccine, which means you are seeking accommodation for secular reasons, not religious.”
Working remotely at time of termination
The plaintiff was placed on an unpaid leave of absence on November 1, 2021, and terminated for cause a month later on December 1, 2021. Notably, D.Y. had been working exclusively from home since May 2021 following her return from maternity leave, and her position was designated as “Mobile Home” under WestJet’s Mobile Workforce Policy.
The court found no issues with D.Y.’s job performance at any time, with her manager testifying that the “working relationship was strong” and that D.Y. “was professional and met deadlines right up until she was placed on unpaid leave.”
Court finds denial of religious exemption unreasonable
The court determined that WestJet failed to properly consider D.Y.’s religious accommodation request for several reasons:
“The Plaintiff’s responses to the questions in the Accommodation Request Form and her pastor’s letter clearly demonstrated a subjective, religious objection to vaccination. There was no evidence at trial that the Defendant questioned the sincerity or honesty of the Plaintiff’s religious beliefs at any time.”
The court criticized WestJet for concluding that D.Y.’s additional safety concerns somehow invalidated her religious objection:
“The Defendant’s evidence did not explain how or why the Plaintiff could not hold both a religious objection and a non-religious objection to vaccination on safety grounds at the same time. It also did not explain why holding a non-religious objection in addition to a religious objection meant the Plaintiff was seeking an accommodation solely on non-religious grounds.”
The court also noted that WestJet never requested further information to address its doubts about D.Y.’s religious exemption, despite its Accommodation Policy expressly stating that employees “may be required to provide additional evidence.”
Dismissal disproportionate response
Even if the denial of the religious exemption had been reasonable, the court found that dismissal for cause was not a proportional response. The court emphasized that D.Y.’s refusal to comply with the vaccination policy did not negatively impact her job performance or endanger others, as she was working remotely.
The court also noted that federal regulations issued on October 30, 2021, only required vaccination for employees accessing “aerodrome property,” which would not have applied to D.Y. while working from home.
“The Defendant did not demonstrate how or why it could not allow the Plaintiff to continue working from home as she had been, particularly after receiving clarity that this would not run afoul of the Regulations,” the court stated.
Termination clause does not limit damages
WestJet argued that the termination clause in D.Y.’s employment agreement limited her to statutory severance in case of termination without cause. However, the court rejected this argument, noting that the clause only applied “provided WestJet terminates your employment without just cause in accordance with the provision of this paragraph.”
Since WestJet never paid D.Y. the applicable statutory minimums as required by the clause, “the necessary condition to trigger the without cause termination provision was never met.”
No moral damages awarded
The court dismissed D.Y.’s claim for moral damages of $21,500, finding that while she was wrongfully terminated, “the surrounding circumstances do not attract aggravated damages. The dismissal was not conducted in an unduly insensitive or egregious manner.”
The court also rejected WestJet’s argument that D.Y. failed to mitigate her damages, finding that even if she failed to take reasonable steps to find alternate employment, the airline did not prove that she would have found suitable employment within the notice period.
For more information, see Yee v WestJet, 2025 ABCJ 87 (CanLII).
