FAQ's Cases - Stewart McKelvey

- 12 -[67] Another complaint was that, when the office went to uniforms, Ms. Pozniak insisted thatthe pockets remain sewn closed for appearance. Furthermore, she insisted that the blouses bewhite and that shoes be black or white. The plaintiff found it funereal. She, along with MissKennedy at least, would have liked the option of adding some colour.[68] Ms. Pozniak’s response is set out, in part, under Expectation 1 to do with uniforms andwill not be repeated here. She added that, around 1994 or 1995, she gave the plaintiff a giftcertificate for a haircut and colour after the plaintiff had said she wanted to get her hair done butlacked the money. This certificate was on top of the Christmas bonus. Ms. Pozniak thought thatshe had asked the plaintiff where she went to get her hair done.[69] Ms. Pozniak also recalled that, before the office went to uniforms, she had found outfrom other staff that the plaintiff lacked the money for work clothing. So, Ms. Pozniak took theplaintiff clothes shopping, which she said she had also done for Debbie St. Pierre. Ms. Pozniakpaid for the clothes. She also got hair care certificates for Ms. St. Pierre and pedicures andmanicures for staff as they wanted. She denied ever telling the plaintiff to get her hair done or towear makeup. She did say that the plaintiff should try makeup because, in Ms. Pozniak’sexperience, doing so could make one feel better. She also recalled calling the plaintiff in toinquire because she did not look well, not asking her if she had had a late night, and thensuggesting after some discussion that the plaintiff see a doctor. She denied ever calling theplaintiff stupid.2011 ONSC 2148 (CanLII)[70] Defence counsel submitted that the plaintiff’s comments regarding her personalappearance is the only one of her complaints that might come close to constructive dismissal, if itis serious enough.[71] It is accepted that Ms. Pozniak expressed concern for the plaintiff’s appearance from botha personal and a professional viewpoint. On a personal level, there was concern for theplaintiff’s health and wellbeing. Ms. Pozniak also went to some trouble and expense to help theplaintiff and other employees with their wardrobes and personal care. On the professional side,Ms. Pozniak expected and enforced within reason a standard for the office, as was her right as anowner and manager of the business.[72] In my view, this item does not amount to constructive dismissal. Even if one accepts theplaintiff’s evidence completely and discounts Roberta Pozniak’s, the incidents complained of arenot serious enough or frequent enough to do so.[73] 6 – No more yelling in the office. If you have a disagreement with someone, pleasedo so quietly in the privacy of your office.