The Employee commenced employment with the Employer in April 2017. The Employer was employed as a Contract

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

The Employee commenced employment with the Employer in April 2017. The Employer was employed as a Contract Teacher Artist who was employed on a year- to-year basis pursuant to written contracts. In the first half of 2020, the Employee was employed for 16 contact hours per week (Monday to Thursday - four hours per day) at a rate of $34.70 per hour with no benefits. In addition, the Employee was employed for four hours per week for administrative work at $25.00 per hour.

The COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020, and it impacted class enrolment. The Employer normally had approximately 94 students per week. By September 2020, the enrollment had dropped to approximately 22 to 23 students per week. The Employee, at an annual performance review, advised she would like more stability and possibly a position with benefits. The Employer proceeded to create a Student Services Coordinator position and offered this position to the Employee in a letter dated September 3, 2020. Relevant parts of the new position are excerpted below:

We are pleased to extend this offer of employment for the position of Student Services Coordinator. Start Date: September 1, 2020 Employment Term: This position is part-time on an ongoing basis for 42 weeks/year. Annual Salary: The per annum pay for this position is $38,861 paid on a pro rata basis.

The Employee verbally accepted the offer and by email dated September 14, 2020, confirmed her acceptance. After the Employee accepted the offer, two issues arose with respect to the Student Services Coordinator position:

• The Employee objected to the new position's focus on administrative duties without any teaching responsibilities, and • The annual salary in the September 3, 2020 offer was described as $38,861 per annum but in reality it was $33,792. Subsequent discussions revealed that the error in the annual salary was a result of including, within the September 3 offer, the cost of the benefit plan as part of the annual salary. The annual salary should have been described as $33,792.

On October 8, 2020, the Employer provided the Employee with a new position description, updated as follows: We are pleased to extend this offer of employment for the position of Student Services Coordinator / Teaching Artist Start Date: September 8, 2020 Employment Term: This is an ongoing part-time position: 24 hours/week, 42 weeks/year. Annual Salary: The per annum pay for this position is $33,792 - paid on a pro rata basis throughout the year.

The Employee continued to voice concerns about the position. On October 17, 2020, the Employer asked the Employee to draft a position that "would work for her". By an email dated October 21, 2020, the Employee provided her proposed position - Community Engagement and Admissions Coordinator.

A series of communications occurred between October 27 and November 3, 2020. Key elements include: · The Employee wondered if the contract accepted on September 14 should be "null and void" due to the mistakes. · The Employee felt pressured to make up her mind to take the job. · The Employee went on a sick leave and chose not to return to work. · The Employer becomes aware that the Employee has met with other staff members and spent significant time discussing the details of these events with staff in a negative light. · The employer sends the Employee and email including the following:

"It has come to my attention that following our conversation on Friday you have chosen to meet with staff members and have taken time to express negative and disparaging remarks that imply defamation not only to (Manager Name) personally but also to the Company as an organization. o If there is something further that you wish to discuss you are free to reach out to me but I am asking that you stop negatively impacting our programs. You are expected to keep the details of this email confidential and any communication with members of our community regarding the details of this email is considered defamation. Discussion of the details with anyone associated with the Company, with the exception of management, reflects poorly on your professionalism.''

The ROE was issued on November 6, 2020 and indicated the reason for leaving was "Shortage of work / End of contract or season". The ROE described the last day ofwork as October 30, 2020. The ROE also stated "Not returning" under the heading "Expected Date of Recall". The Employee filed her complaint on March 7, 2021.

Additional Facts

·The Employee asserts that, based upon the Employer's proposed changes to her terms of employment between September 1, 2020 and October 30, 2020, she was constructively dismissed. The Employer responds that the Employee resigned and, regardless, the changes were not significant enough to amount to constructive dismissal. · The Appeal Body considered whether it was even necessary to decide if the proposed changes were or were not a constructive dismissal.

Q1. Facts: indicate six key facts in this case. add an annotation clarifying why this is a key fact.
Q2. Issues: What are three questions that need to be answered in this case?
Q3. Legislation: Identify the applicable legislation:

Q4. What is one assumption that you are making about jurisdiction when identifying the applicable legislation?
Q5. Analysis: What are three actions that an HR professional could take to reduce the employers' risk in this scenario? Be specific.
Q6. List three things that are considered in determining if constructive dismissal has occurred. For each, explain if with the information available, you think constructive dismissal has occurred. Consideration Has threshold of "constructive dismissal" been met?
Q7. Do you think the employee was constructively dismissed? Why or why not. Support answer with at least three pieces of evidence
Q8. Why might constructive dismissal not need to be considered in this case? Support with at least three pieces of evidence.