Crimp Circuit worker didn’t seek new work following wrongful dismissal: Ontario court

Patel v. Crimp Circuit Inc.

In May 2022, the Ontario Small Claims Court ruled that Prashant Patel, a Crimp Circuit employee, was wrongfully dismissed.

However, the Court also found that Patel didn’t make reasonable efforts to find similar work in his field and reduced the amount of severance awarded. Additional issues arose when it came to his length of service. There were several breaks during the course of his employment.

Facts

• Patel worked for Crimp Circuit as a “Quality Assurance Inspector”. He was 54 years old at the time of his dismissal.
• There was a dispute regarding Patel’s length of service over the past 14 years. Crimp Circuit claimed that he had resigned and returned on three separate occasions. Patel stated that he obtained proper authorization from the company for each occasion to be off from work.
• Crimp Circuit claimed that it provided Patel with sufficient notice of termination. The company said it held a meeting and provided several notices to staff ahead of its inevitable closure.
• When Crimp Circuit was purchased, the purchaser offered Patel a similar position and a higher hourly wage. However, he was suspicious of the offer. Patel declined and didn’t contact the new business for further information.
• Crimp Circuit provided evidence that several companies were looking to hire for positions similar to the one Patel was in. The company claimed that it had relayed these open positions to him at the time that they became available.
• Patel admitted he didn’t contact any of the companies that Crimp Circuit informed him about. As well, he didn’t request a reference letter, which Crimp Circuit claimed they would have provided.
• Patel applied for approximately 36 positions following his dismissal. However, none of the jobs were in the same or related field. Instead, he applied for positions in the healthcare industry, daycares, senior homes and lab industries, all of which he had no experience or training in.

The Court’s Decision

While the Court ruled that Patel had been wrongfully dismissed by Crimp Circuit, his notice period (severance pay) was reduced from 14 months to five months as a result of his failure to mitigate his losses.

The reduction amounted to a loss of approximately $24,000.

Length of service

It was concluded that Patel had been employed by Crimp Circuit for a total of 14 years. The Court found his evidence more consistent with the documentary evidence, which included:

• A pay stub indicating a start date of June 18, 2005.
• A copy of Patel’s passport showing a trip to India during one of the occasions where Crimp Circuit claimed he had resigned.

Additionally, Crimp Circuit didn’t provide any letters of resignation or a Record of Employment to show breaks in Patel’s service. Employers are required to do so under the Employment Insurance Regulations in these circumstances.

READ MORE
• Do I get severance if I quit?

Notice of termination

While a formal termination notice was not provided to Patel until February 6, 2019, the Court did take into account that he had been warned of the anticipated sale of Crimp Circuit on several occasions prior to that date.

Patel’s evidence highlighted that he didn’t take the notices seriously as there was still a lot of work coming in. He perceived them as threats in an attempt to get employees to work harder since he had heard that for years the company would be closing.

The Court ruled the warnings could not be discounted and that Patel should have taken the notices seriously.

LEARN MORE
• Employment Law Show: What you need to know about working notice

Failure to look for a similar position

The Court also found that Patel didn’t make reasonable efforts to find a similar job in the same field he had previously worked in.

While it was understood that Patel was uncertain about the offer of employment made by the purchaser of Crimp Circuits, he didn’t look for:

• Other quality assurance jobs
• Work in printed circuit board industries or related fields

Instead, he applied to more than a dozen jobs in industries that he had no experience or training in.

Lessons for Employees

• Breaks in employment: If you’re going to be off work for an extended period of time (i.e. sick leave, personal leave, etc.), make sure the leave is well-documented. This is important if your company decides to fire you or let you go in the future. Having the proper documentation will help you avoid any doubts about your length of service, which is an important factor when determining your appropriate notice period.
• Looking for new work post-dismissal: An important consideration in any wrongful dismissal case is the employee’s ability to find comparable employment. While you aren’t required to apply just any job, it’s important to make a reasonable effort to look for a similar position.

Lessons for Employers

• Document major changes in the employment relationship: Employers must ensure that a worker’s file is well-documented when any changes or breaks occur in the relationship. Keep a written record of discussions with staff (i.e. letters, emails, or text messages), preferably with a signature from the employee confirming the content of the conversation.
• Employers are responsible for showing that staff failed to mitigate damages: Companies can’t take the position that an employee didn’t make reasonable efforts to find new work post-dismissal without supporting evidence. If you’re aware of opportunities in a similar position, provide those listings to the worker you fired or let go. Encourage them to apply and provide support where possible (i.e. drafting a reference letter).

How we can assist

If you have been wrongfully dismissed in Ontario, contact the experienced employment law team at Samfiru Tumarkin LLP.

Our Ontario employment lawyers (and those in Alberta and B.C.) can review your situation and ensure you receive the compensation you are owed.