River is a manager at Gibble Gobble, a high$-$end pet supply store. One of her new employees, Sam, decided to bring their dog $($Tipu$)$ into work with them yesterday, without checking with River. The animal was very well$-$behaved and in fact customers seem to respond very positively to Tipu. While River would be fine with Sam bringing Tipu to work again, she would like to put a policy in place, requiring employees to get manager approval before bringing a pet to work. Her reasoning is that she would like an opportunity to prevent too many pets from being in the store and or prevent negative interactions between anxious$/$aggressive animals and customers. The employment contract is silent about employee pets being on Gibble Gobble premises. Is this a policy that River will likely be able to enforce?

Answer

To communicate the policy clearly, River provides an electronic copy to each employee, and posts a copy in the staff break room. Since the staff is fairly small $($she supervises $10$ employees$),$ River is having a conversation about the new policy with each employee and keeping a brief record that each conversation took place.

A week after the new policy was posted, Grish, a long term employee, brings his cat in to work without checking with River first. River checks her notes to see if she has had a conversation with Grish about the new policy. She has had a conversation. One breach of policy is$,$ in this case Answer

to constitute just cause for dismissal. If discipline is necessary, River should use Answer

discipline, likely starting with a Answer

$.$ As part of progressive discipline, River should give Grish clear expectations and an opportunity to improve. River should not suspend Grish or terminate his employment. River should also carefully avoid condoning a breach of policy or sending mixed messages. If River appears to ignore the breaking of a rule, River can not later discipline the employee for breaking that same rule. An employee whose employment is terminated for cause can sue for Answer

$($two words$)$ if the complained$-$of behaviour was condoned.

The policy does not introduce a major unilateral $($as opposed to bilateral $--$ negotiated with the employee$)$ change to the employment relationship, therefore it is unlikely to be the cause of a lawsuit for constructive dismissal. Which of the following would likely result in a lawsuit for constructive dismissal? Select two:

Sam organized his workplace to join or form a union

Grish contacted the Alberta Human Right Commission

River changed GibbleGobble$$s opening hours, opening one hour later

River ignored an employee$$s complaints about ongoing verbal abuse and harassment

River cut Sam$$s work hours from $40$ per week to $10$ per week