Gender Implications of Wrongful Dismissal Judgments in Canada, 1994–2002

Authors


  • *The author would like to thank the CRSA reviewers for their helpful comments. This research was completed while the author was a doctoral student at the University of Alberta. She is currently teaching at Grant MacEwan College in Edmonton, Alberta. This manuscript was first submitted in January 2003 and accepted in September 2003. Contact: slr@ualberta.ca.

Abstract

l'étude sur laquelle cet article se fonde explore les aboutissements des demandes d'carindemnités pour congédiement injustifié déposées par des hommes et des femmes contre leur ancien employeur. Elle révèle l'existence au sein du système juridique d'carun préjugé en faveur des hommes même si un traitement égal des deux sexes devant la loi est devenu un principe constitutionnel il y a 20 ans. l'analyse suggère que trois facteurs primaires, soit l'âge de l'employé(e), son ancienneté et le poste occupé au moment du congédiement, sont utilisés dans la détermination des jugements en dommages-intérêts, et que les cours tendent à accorder de plus importantes indemnités aux hommes.

The study on which this paper is based explored the outcomes of wrongful dismissal claims brought by men and women against their former employers. It revealed that a bias favouring men exists within the legal system, even though equal treatment of men and women under the law became a constitutional principle twenty years ago. Analysis suggests that three primary factors–the age of the employee, his or her job tenure, and the occupation held at the time of dismissal–are used to determine damage awards, and that courts tend to award the highest levels of compensation to men.

Ancillary