The Court awarded our client 24 months payment of salary and benefits following her termination and entirely accepted our position that even with our client’s competence and experience she would have a difficult time obtaining a similar job. The Court accepted our position that 30 years of service and a dismissal at age 60 ought to result in a significant severance payment and mentioned that our client was justified in declining a 1 year severance package which the employer ought to have known was insufficient.
With respect to our client’s dedicated service the Court concurred that her lengthy period of employment was likely to be a serious impediment in finding another job. Specifically, having virtually no work experience outside of that obtained through her former employer placed our client at a competitive disadvantage in obtaining new employment.
Further, this was yet another Whitten & Lublin decision where the Court agreed with our view that an employee 60 years of age or older must be entitled to greater severance. The Court cited our past cases of Hussain v. Suzuki Canada Ltd. and Leeming v. IBM Canada Ltd. to confirm that “age is an impediment” for older worker’s seeking new employment. Simply, the job market is difficult for older workers competing with younger, more recently trained and likely less expensive talent.
If you have been dismissed consider consulting the experts at Whitten and Lublin for an informed assessment of your severance.
Author: Paul Macchione, Whitten & Lublin