Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: A Case Study

Introduction

In many businesses today, employers recognize the importance of a safe and peaceful working environment as it influences the level of employee engagement. For this reason, employees are always expected to behave in a manner that maintains this tranquility. From the case, Seth's behavior can be described as sexual harassment, which is conduct that goes against organizational policies and employment contracts.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Sexual harassment remains a problem in the workplace, which can be seen in the example between Seth and Jane. Given Seth's repetitive behavior, Sam has an obligation to terminate Seth's employment for having repeatedly engaged in behavior that breaches his employment contract. Similarly, Sam has the obligation to discipline Seth progressively, giving him a chance to change his behaviors, and to ensure other employees learn that such misconducts are not condoned in the work environment.

Sexual harassment in the work environment is unacceptable under Ontario Human Rights Laws (CanLII). In a case where employers are reluctant to take appropriate actions against perpetrators, the victims are allowed to take further actions. For instance, if Sam does not do what is required, Jane has the option of filing a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal to ensure that she is compensated accordingly.

Question 2

If employees perform some work after regular working hours, they are entitled to overtime pay. Under the Canadian Employment Standards Act, all jurisdictions require that employees be paid overtime for all hours beyond their standard workday or week. The overtime pay in all Canadian jurisdictions is calculated at 1.5 times that of the regular hourly rate of pay (CanLII).

It is clear under the Employment Standards Act that employers shall pay their employees overtime pay of at least one and one-half time their regular rate for each hour of work in excess of their standard working hours (CanLII). In the case, given that Sam has only paid Dave regular hourly pay for the extra hours he worked in a period of six weeks, she still owes him more money under the Canadian employment laws. Assuming Dave has a regular hourly pay of $15, then Sam still owes him $ 495 of overtime pay. Therefore, Sam should pay Dave overtime pay of $ 1485.

Overall, all Canadian employees have the contractual right to overtime pay for extra hours exceeding regularly working hours, and for most employers in Canada, the Employment Standard Act defines the rules for extra pay for overtime work (CanLII). For instance, in the case study, in an event that Sam refuses to pay Dave the appropriate amount for extra hours, he is obligated to file an overtime complaint with the Employment Standards Branch of the Ministry of Labour. This action will activate certain administrative processes and procedures that will ensure that he is compensated accordingly.

Question 3

When hiring, some businesses include clauses in employment contract, the contract employers enter into with their new recruits, to ensure that there are no misunderstandings, and in some cases, to obtain legal rights that they may otherwise not have over their employees. In the case, the type of clause that Sam included in the contract with his former spinning instructor is referred to as non-solicitation clause. This is an important clause in case of a breach of contract that gives certain legal rights to employers over their employees. It temporarily prohibits employees from working for clients and business associates of their former employers after the termination of employment irrespective of how the termination occurred.

Overall, non-solicitation clause offers protection for employers as long as it does not compromise employees' abilities to work in their preferred fields. If Sam sues his former spinning instructor for violating a provision in his contract, she will be successful with the case because the instructor's actions, in calling and soliciting the clients of his former employer, is a clear violation of the non-solicitation clause.

Question 4

All employees are entitled to a given amount of notice when they are dismissed without cause (CanLII). Therefore, employers must provide reasonable notice to avoid claims for wrongful dismissal. Factors relevant to determine the amount of reasonable notice include employee's age, length of service, availability of similar employment, and the position held. In the case study situation, for example, employee's age and length of service can be used to determine how much notice and pay Jess will be given upon termination of a contract.

Under the Employment Standards Act, the amount of notice provided by the employer cannot be less than the amount that the employee is supposedly entitled to (CanLII). If Jess sues Sam for wrongful dismissal and still refuses to take another job offer, it may affect the outcome of the lawsuit. Essentially, this is because employee's length of service is sometimes regarded as continuous by the court even with breaks in the employee's service.

Question 5

Laura is facing workplace discrimination based on her religion. The Statute she can use to address her treatment is the Human Rights Code (CanLII)

In support of her claim, Laura would argue that her stand was based on religious reasons, which under the Employment Standards Act requires accommodation. Sam, on the other hand, would argue that the cost of accommodating employees for any reason would significantly affect the economic health or her business.

Considering the situation, I believe that Laura will succeed. Overall, this is because the Ontario Human Rights Code prohibits workplace discrimination on specified grounds such as religious affiliation.

In the case that Laura's lawsuit is successful, Sam will be expected to make changes that can accommodate Laura and allow her to perform her job.

Works Cited

CanLII. Consolidated Statutes of Ontario. 25 Nov. 2019, www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/.

CanLII. Employment Standards Act, 2000. Employment Standards Act, 2000, SO 2000, c 41, 8 Nov. 2019, www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/so-2000-c-41/latest/.

CanLII. Human Rights Code. Human Rights Code, RSO 1990, c H.19, 26 Mar. 2019, www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-h19/latest/#document.