CCPartners | Blog

Ontario Court of Appeal Upholds Termination for Cause for Long-Service Employee who was Driving while Drunk

Most employment lawyers would agree that proving just cause for a single, isolated incident for a long-service employee is an uphill battle that is not worth the fight.  That being said, there are times when the courts will occasionally uphold a termination for cause on the basis of a single event where the nature of the offence is egregious in nature, and seriously undermines the employment relationship.  In a recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, the court upheld a decision of the trial judge which found that cause existed when an employee was terminated after driving his employer’s vehicle while intoxicated.

In Dziecielski v. Lighting Dimensions Inc., 2012 ONSC 1877, an employee with 23 years of service drove his employer’s vehicle, without authorization, while intoxicated.  While driving, the employee was responsible for a serious accident which destroyed the company vehicle and left him with life threatening injuries.  Prior to this incident, the employee had no history of misconduct or performance issues.

As part of the terms of his employment, the employee signed an Employee Handbook which indicated that consumption of alcohol off of the premises while conducting business is prohibited and could result in termination.  This offence was also categorized as a “major” breach under the terms of the Handbook.  Further, as part of his job duties, the employee was obliged to drive his own vehicle. 

 As a result of a breach of the Handbook and his conduct, the employee was fired for cause.  He was also charged with a number of criminal offences related to drunk driving under the Criminal Code.  Following his termination, the employee filed a wrongful dismissal suit seeking damages for reasonable notice, punitive and aggravated damages.   

Although the trial judge acknowledged that proving just cause for a single, isolated event is an uphill battle, particularly where the employee has a blemish-free record, he nonetheless concluded the following:

• Drunk driving is considered at large to be a serious criminal office, and in this case, the employee’s misconduct was made worse by the fact that he was not just intoxicated while working, but rather drunk on a public highway with the employer’s vehicle;
• The employee must have known that drinking four beers while operating the employer’s vehicle is serious misconduct; and
• The employee’s conduct was prejudicial to the employer’s business, and may have been at risk of being found vicariously liable to third parties, and at risk for WSIB claims and premium consequences.

On appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal, the court found that even though the employee had an unblemished employment record, the trial judge made no error when it determined that just cause existed when the employee drove the company vehicle while intoxicated. 

What can employers take away from this decision? It appears that the court is signalling a more stringent approach towards driving while intoxicated in the workplace. While this is promising for employers, it is important to note that each case is decided on an individualized basis, and employers should ensure that they have conducted a thorough investigation when asserting just cause for termination. The lawyers at CCP can help employers navigate the very difficult issue of just cause terminations in both the union and non-union settings.