Search

This case comment considers the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Cronk v. Canadian General Insurance Company, where the court upheld a method of assessing wrongful dismissal damages known as the "managerial/clerical distinction". The distinction means that in awarding damages for reasonable notice, judges categorize occupations according to job "status", or how employees fit into the workplace hierarchy, and reserve the longest notice awards for those in the "highest" positions. The writer contends that there are serious analytical and factual deficiencies in the underlying rationales offered in support of the managerial/clerical distinction. More importantly, the rule has an adverse effect on women workers overall because of their position as a group in the workforce and the way in which their work is valued. By reserving the highest notice awards for those who enjoy the most "status" in the workplace, the managerial/clerical distinction reinforces and reflects many of the gender inequalities that are prevalent features of the workplace. The writer analyzes how the managerial/clerical distinction means that women's loss of work is devalued in the same way, and for many of the same reasons, that women's work has been traditionally undervalued. The writer observes that the rule is not in keeping with the Supreme Court of Canada's direction that common law rules should develop in accord with Charter principles that include equality principles. Whether as an argument based on Charter equality rights, or as a more general call for equity and fairness, it is argued that the flawed rationales behind the rule, and its potential adverse effect on women workers as a group, must be reconsidered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]