Need Advice: Unethical Employer & Termination

[Yamer]

In late May I was let go from my job for “financial reasons”. Essentially, it was explained to me that my position was being terminated due to budgetary constraints and the fact that the duties were not of sufficient value to the organization.

I recently discovered that the organization re-hired for my position in mid-August under a different title (same duties/responsibilities). The person they hired was a personal friend of the General Manager (my boss), and a person that originally gave the GM their job in 2013.

For additional context, my termination was handled incredibly poorly (the details are far more dramatic than is necessary to post). However, in knowing what they did and how they handled it I almost feel a responsibility to do something about it so that this situation never happens again. Problem is, I’m not sure precisely what steps to take. I don’t necessarily want (or can even get) compensation, and I certainly do not want that job back, but I do want them to be held accountable in some fashion.

Useful information to know:

• I was employed for 2 years, given the minimum but acceptable severance according to employment standards, and I signed a release.
• The organization is a union, but it was a non-unionized job.
• The industry is mandated (but not really regulated) by provincial legislation.
• My termination and the re-hire were within the same fiscal year.
• This action violates internal nepotism policies.

My questions are:

1. Do I have any legal recourse for complaint?
2. Are there other avenues that I can explore to file a complaint or instigate an investigation?
3. What might be the best way to address my termination with potential employers? Financial reasons were given, but clearly false. I do not wish to lie to potential employers, especially since a quick search will determine I was replaced. I also do not trust the General Manager to give me a proper endorsement through reference.

If anyone needs additional information in order to properly advise I would be happy to provide it in PM. Just do not wish to make all the details public. Any advice or opinions before I contact legal counsel would be appreciated!

[Rathji]

1 and 2. You are not in a unionized job, but Alberta Labour can probably point you in the right direction.

3. I don't know what 'Financial Reasons' means exactly in this context, but I am assuming that it is not going to be a concern for potential employers. Your boss would be very foolish to do anymore than confirming that you worked there and for how long, when responding to a request from your potential employers, as it will open him up to legal repercussions. I wouldn't clarify it with them, unless they pressed the issue.

[afc wimbledon]

I was employed for 2 years, given the minimum but acceptable severance according to employment standards, and I signed a release.

I think they have fulfilled their obligation with the severance and you have hooped yourself with signing a release, ultimately a company can let you go with no particular reason if they pay you the appropriate severance and don't bad mouth you after on a reference.

[PepsiFree]

Yeah, I’m not an expert here, but I dont believe there’s any recourse for termination without cause as long as the proper notice and severance is given.

It’s a little underhanded, but if the employer felt the person they knew was a better fit than you, all they have to do is give you notice and severance (I believe).

[Ducay]

Sounds like a gear grinder more than anything. Cruddy deal for sure, but trying to get some moral victory would certainly cost you a tonne of time, reputational capital, and maybe even some money.

[Ozy_Flame]

Yeah you signed off on it and I think you're boned here.

However, that doesn't mean you can't write a damning Glassdoor review!

[iggy_oi]

Yamer I have sent you a pm.

[llwhiteoutll]

They are in the clear here, no laws were broken and they technically didn’t do anything wrong.

The laid you off and paid termination in accordance with the law. They don’t need to give you right of first refusal if they decide to re-hire for the position at a later date. Presumably they called it a lay off on your ROE and you have been able to claim EI?

With regards to future employers, tell them what you were told. The position was eliminated and you were laid off.

[Yamer]

Thanks everyone. I expected I wouldn't be able to seek restitution, and frankly this isn't about monetary compensation. Employment Standards AB confirmed that they were compliant and could only direct me to seek legal counsel.

So there is no avenue to file complaints about employment practices to an official body in AB? It's concerning that employers can get away with this kind of shady business consequence free.

[llwhiteoutll]

How would you legislate this type of thing though?

So long as they follow the rulers around severance for not for cause termination, you can’t expect to tell private companies who they can and can’t hire or tell them who is suitable for the job or not.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Yamer

So there is no avenue to file complaints about employment practices to an official body in AB? It's concerning that employers can get away with this kind of shady business consequence free.

Complain about what though? That they lied to you about why you were being let go, paid you out and hired a buddy? That sounds like a social media complaint but nothing more.

It sucks, but you were given compensation and signed a release.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

How would you legislate this type of thing though?

So long as they follow the rulers around severance for not for cause termination, you can’t expect to tell private companies who they can and can’t hire or tell them who is suitable for the job or not.

For sure, and I see your point. However, it would be reassuring if there was an investigative body that could look into these kinds of situations. Given enough reports and complaints they would be authorized to look into the business practices of said organization.

I mean, firing somebody because you can't afford to keep them, then hiring somebody else that knows someone is pretty unethical. That is essentially why I was fired. My performance reviews were outstanding, and I never faced any discipline or even had a "talk" with my employer about my performance/conduct. Hell, I received a significant raise 3 months before my dismissal.

If you terminate a position because you can't fit it into the budget, you shouldn't be able to reinstate that position within 3 months. Especially only 4 months into a fiscal year.

If I'm unsuitable for the position, let me go for that reason. If you can't justify it, you shouldn't be able to upend someone's life because you want to work with your buddy. The fact an employer can orchestrate this completely legally is disturbing.

As Ducay said, this is probably more gear grinder than anything given what's available. It's still disappointing that while they aren't necessarily protected by these actions, employers are not held accountable.

Thanks for your input and advice, though!

[Torture]

Thing is, a company can fire someone that's non-unionized for any reason (or no reason at all) as long as they provide the appropriate severance and provided it's not a protected ground under human rights.

I could fire someone because I don't like stinky Edmonton Oiler fans (and who would blame me) and it just comes down to how much I pay them.

The fact that they said they had budgetary constraints may or may not be true and even if you hadn't signed a release, doesn't really mean anything.

[Oling_Roachinen]

With being offered and accepting the severance package and the reason they gave you, you were terminated without cause. Really, a company does not need any reason to terminate-without-cause as long as it's not violating human rights legislation or is discriminatory in nature.

Employers, outside of the above mentioned exceptions, have the right to run their company as they see fit when it comes to non-unionized positions. If that means legally laying off good employees and replacing them with friends, that's really (as far as I know) perfectly acceptable if not a good business practice.

Probably their biggest mistake was giving you a reason at all.

[calf]

Did the release you sign say it was due to budget, or just something they said off the cuff in your meeting? Or did you release say you were released without cause, hence the buy-out?

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by calf

Did the release you sign say it was due to budget, or just something they said off the cuff in your meeting? Or did you release say you were released without cause, hence the buy-out?

I'm not sure about the release, I would have to dig it out. It does say "for financial reasons through no fault of his own" on my ROE.

I should be thankful that they did the decent thing and set me up well to receive EI, but it's difficult to be positive when you're still sitting unemployed with limited prospects and you're just surviving.

Sounds like I'm probably just boned on this one. Live and learn, I suppose.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Yamer

I'm not sure about the release, I would have to dig it out. It does say "for financial reasons through no fault of his own" on my ROE.

I should be thankful that they did the decent thing and set me up well to receive EI, but it's difficult to be positive when you're still sitting unemployed with limited prospects and you're just surviving.

Sounds like I'm probably just boned on this one. Live and learn, I suppose.

Call them up and see if they can help with any contacts for getting another job, guilt them a out a bit

[Nage Waza]

There might be more to the story. If a boss orchestrated a layoff with the cost of a severance package, and this was done just to hire the friend of the boss, there could be more at stake. Was the boss an owner? Was there a payout due to a referral? Do the owners know what occurred? Are there investors that might be concerned? Does the company have to justify their rates based on a regulatory body?

I don't know which of the above have any legal impact, but it really grinds my gears when companies don't take care of their employees.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

There might be more to the story. If a boss orchestrated a layoff with the cost of a severance package, and this was done just to hire the friend of the boss, there could be more at stake. Was the boss an owner? Was there a payout due to a referral? Do the owners know what occurred? Are there investors that might be concerned? Does the company have to justify their rates based on a regulatory body?

I don't know which of the above have any legal impact, but it really grinds my gears when companies don't take care of their employees.

Now, I won't disclose exactly who my employer was, but some of you probably know from my past posts, and those that don't will probably be able to piece it together from the preceding and following info.

The owners of the organization are the members, who pay mandatory dues. The members elect from their ranks an executive branch and board of governors every year. Members would be the concerned investors, but most of them don't even know they belong to a union. The overwhelming majority (approx 80-90%) do not even care to vote for their leadership. The organization justifies its rates according to internal policy and BOG approval. Payouts on severance and most expenditures are approved by a 5 member executive branch.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

There might be more to the story. If a boss orchestrated a layoff with the cost of a severance package, and this was done just to hire the friend of the boss, there could be more at stake. Was the boss an owner? Was there a payout due to a referral? Do the owners know what occurred? Are there investors that might be concerned? Does the company have to justify their rates based on a regulatory body?

Would any of that be of interest or concern to a just-released employee?