A Hong Kong-based airline that permanently closed operations in Vancouver in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic has been ordered to pay compensation of nearly $ 170,000 to the woman who ran the office.
Frances Turcic Okano spent most of her career, almost 35 years, working for Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. at the airline’s Vancouver office, according to a BC Supreme Court ruling posted Friday online.
When the pandemic began in early 2020, Cathay Pacific’s passenger traffic was reduced to less than one percent of what it had been during the previous year, prompting the company to take a number of measures. ‘cost savings.
Eventually, these measures grew to include the closure of the Vancouver office. Okano and the 71 employees he supervised finished their jobs.
According to court documents, Okano was informed of the decision on October 13, 2020 and was told that his work would end on December 11, 2020, with two months ’notice.
He received the basic three-month compensation required by the Canada Labor Code in early 2021, and received a total of $ 31,613.72, according to the court ruling.
Cathay Pacific offered her an additional compensation package, but she turned it down and took the airline to court in hopes of getting better terms.
Okano argued that he was entitled to a refund of wages that had been cut as part of the company’s cost-saving measures, as well as a 24- to 26-month salary in lieu of notice for the company. his dismissal.
Cathay Pacific agreed that Okano was entitled to compensation for damages for unfair dismissal, but argued whether wage cuts should be reinstated and argued for a salary of 18 to 20 months instead of notice.
BC Supreme Court Judge Gordon C. Weatherill sided with the airline in his decision.
NO REMUNERATION OF SALARY REDUCTIONS
As for pay cuts, Okano said she should receive $ 10,692 that was not paid when the company put her on unpaid leave as a cost-saving measure in 2020.
He noted that the company’s compensation package offer, which he did not accept, had included an offer to pay him that amount.
Weatherill was not moved by this argument, however, writing in its decision that an unaccepted offer “does not constitute a contractual obligation”.
“It is clear from all the evidence, and I find it so, that the plaintiff accepted (salary reductions) in exchange for her continued employment, that she could be in danger due to the pandemic, and that she was not expected to reducing his salary would be reimbursed, “Weatherill wrote in his decision.
“PLAINTIFF LOVES HER WORK”
With respect to the severance pay instead of the notice, Cathay Pacific argued that Okano had not taken reasonable steps to mitigate the financial losses it would suffer as a result of its dismissal.
Weatherill again agreed with the airline, albeit only partially. He did not accept the company’s suggestion that Okano should have taken advantage of its offer of outplacement services, and concluded that it was not clear that he could receive these services without also accepting the compensation package.
Similarly, the judge found it unreasonable to expect Okano’s job search to begin while she was still employed by Cathay Pacific.
“The uncontroversial evidence is that the plaintiff loved her job with the defendant,” Weatherill wrote. “There is no doubt that she was dedicated to it and that she was devastated by her loss after almost 35 years of service. No wonder she had a hard time accepting her sudden termination.”
Okano admitted that she did nothing to look for a new job before February 2021, Weatherill wrote, noting that she was “sad, demotivated and had lost confidence” after her last day of work.
“I believe that during the period February to June 2021, the plaintiff’s attempts to find a new job can best be described as ‘passive,'” Weatherill wrote. “In February 2021, the plaintiff created a resume and started looking for vacancies in different online jobs. He received several notifications and alerts from job postings, but found none of them to be suitable for a person of his ability. “
As a result, the judge reduced his compensation to three months’ notice, accepting Cathay Pacific’s evidence that several suitable positions in the airline industry were available in February 2021.
“The plaintiff was unaware of these opportunities or chose not to pursue them because she decided that she had earned the right to seek employment outside the airline industry,” she wrote. “I disagree. In my view, it was up to the plaintiff to explore the positions available in the same industry in which she had spent her entire career.”
Based on the amount of time Okano had worked for the company and his role within it, Weatherill determined that he was entitled to 24-month compensation in lieu of notice of termination.
This figure was reduced by three months because he did not take reasonable steps to secure a new job, and by two more months for the two months of notice he received.
Thus, Weatherill awarded Okano 19 months in damages, less the three months that Cathay Pacific had already paid him under the Canada Labor Code, which resulted in a total compensation of $ 168,609.28.
He was also awarded a special compensation of $ 1,764, which represents the cost of a leadership course he took after graduation to strengthen his resume as well as court costs.