Client Win: Legal assistant rejects ‘take it or leave it’ offer from new employer, wins 14 months’ pay

After nearly 16 years of dedicated service, a legal assistant found herself facing an impossible choice. Her employer was retiring, and a successor firm extended an offer that looked similar on the surface but included a slew of hidden pitfalls. It wasn’t just a job offer—it was a step backward, with reduced protections, increased demands, and significant uncertainties. She had every reason to ask questions, seek clarification, and request a fair deal.

When her reasonable efforts were met with a swift withdrawal of the offer, the matter escalated to court. That’s where Samfiru Tumarkin LLP stepped in, securing a groundbreaking decision at Ontario Superior Court that not only affirmed her right to fairness but also sent a clear message about the limits of mitigation and the importance of meaningful negotiation.

Here’s how it happened—and why it matters for employees and employers alike.

The Case: Aylesworth v. The Law Office of Harvey Storm

Ms. Aylesworth, 54, had devoted nearly 16 years as a legal assistant to a real estate lawyer’s practice in Pickering. When her employer, The Law Office of Harvey Storm, decided to retire, he sold his practice to a larger firm: Real Estate Lawyers.ca LLP. She was offered a new position by the successor company, but it came with conditions that were—at best—unsettling and—at worst—an erosion of her existing rights.

The Offer: A Step Backwards

While the proposed salary matched Aylesworth’s current pay (approximately $40,000), everything else about the offer screamed red flags:

• Her sick days would now count against vacation time.
• Summer vacations (a long-standing perk) were likely off the table.
• She’d go from being a permanent employee to one on probation.
• Her Ontario severance rights (as much as 24 months’ pay) would plummet to statutory minimums under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) .
• The new employer could transfer her to a different office without her consent.
• She would take on additional responsibilities—like full-time reception duties—with no extra pay.

Would you accept a deal like this without question? Neither did she.

Standing Her Ground

Aylesworth didn’t outright reject the offer. She did what any prudent, experienced professional would do: she asked for time to consult her employment lawyer and raised reasonable concerns about the terms. She even made a counteroffer, seeking a modest pay increase to reflect the additional burdens and requesting clarification on the conditions.

Instead of engaging in dialogue or negotiation, the successor firm withdrew the offer within an hour, shutting down the conversation entirely. They later argued that by not accepting the deal “as is,” she had failed to mitigate her damages.

The Court’s Decision: A Resounding Victory

This case went to court, where Samfiru Tumarkin LLP fought tirelessly to prove that our client’s actions were reasonable. Justice Sean Dunphy agreed. Here’s why this decision is groundbreaking:

1. The Offer Wasn’t Truly Comparable: The court found that the terms of the new offer were so significantly different—and worse—that it was perfectly reasonable for our client to seek clarification and attempt to negotiate. As the judge noted, “mitigation” doesn’t mean sacrificing your dignity or blindly accepting less favourable conditions just to stay employed.
2. Reasonable Questions ≠ Rejection: The court rejected the argument that the legal assistant’s counteroffer and questions constituted a refusal. It emphasized that raising concerns about significant changes to one’s employment isn’t just reasonable—it’s prudent.
3. Proportionality Matters: In an era of overburdened courts, this case underscores that wrongful dismissal actions, especially where facts are largely uncontested, are ideally suited for summary judgment. By avoiding a lengthy trial, justice was delivered faster and more cost-effectively.

The Outcome

• Ultimately, the court awarded our client 14 months of severance pay—approximately $32,500, less statutory deductions—recognizing her loyalty, the drastic changes in employment terms, and the challenges of finding comparable work at her age. This amount is to be paid by The Law Office of Harvey Storm.
• Her former employer was also ordered to pay $13,000 in legal costs—an amount agreed upon by both parties,.

What This Means For You

For Employees

• You Have the Right to Fair Treatment: If a job offer comes with worse conditions than your previous role, you are not obligated to accept it to satisfy mitigation requirements. Courts will support reasonable actions to seek clarification and negotiate fair terms.
• Details Matter: Look beyond salary. Changes to vacation policies, probationary periods, and severance entitlements can significantly affect the quality of your employment. Seek legal advice from Samfiru Tumarkin LLP before making decisions.
• Mitigation Has Limits: While employees are expected to make reasonable efforts to find comparable work, you are not required to accept every offer, especially if the terms are objectively less favourable. The law prioritizes fairness, not blind compliance.
• Severance Pay Can Be Significant: Your severance amount depends on factors like your age, length of service, position, and the availability of comparable work. In some cases, employees may be awarded up to 24 months’ pay. Use our Severance Pay Calculator to get a sense of what you may be owed.
• Your Rights When Your Employer is Bought Out: If your employer’s business is sold or merged, the new employer must offer comparable terms if they want to continue your employment. Significant changes to duties, pay, or protections could mean you are entitled to severance from the original employer.

For Employers

• Clear, Comparable Offers Are Critical: If transitioning employees to a successor company, ensure the new terms are comparable to their current roles. Drastic reductions in benefits, responsibilities, or protections can lead to disputes and financial liability.
• Respect the Process: Employees need time to review offers, seek advice, and raise questions. Pressuring them for immediate acceptance can create legal complications.
• Dismissals Have Consequences: Providing proper notice or severance isn’t optional. Trying to cut corners, especially with long-term employees, can lead to costly payouts and legal fees.

We’re here to help

At Samfiru Tumarkin LLP, we know employment law inside and out. Since 2007, we’ve secured countless victories for non-unionized employees across Ontario, Alberta, and B.C., always striving for fairness, clarity, and justice. Our team doesn’t just fight for our clients—we empower them to understand their rights and take control of their futures.

If you’re facing a workplace challenge, whether it’s a wrongful dismissal, severance negotiation, or an employment contract that doesn’t feel right, reach out to us. We’ll fight for you, just as we did for Ms. Aylesworth.

Don’t settle for less than you deserve. Let’s write your success story—contact us today.