Summary
In a recent decision, an Ontario Court dismissed claims for wrongful dismissal and other damages brought by a long-haul truck driver whose employment was terminated because his employer found that he violated its drug and alcohol policy. In rejecting these claims, the Court affirms the importance of clearly communicating workplace policies and procedures, as well as ensuring that employees understand how violating policies may affect the continuation of the employment relationship.
The Facts
In McCarthy v Bison Transport Inc, 2026 ONSC 3729, the Ontario Superior Court considered whether an employee was wrongfully dismissed after his employer terminated his employment for cause for violating its drug and alcohol policy.
The employee was a long-haul truck driver whose routes included those between Canada and the United States. At the time of hiring, the employee signed an employment agreement which required that the employee abide by the employer’s policies. On several occasions near the start of his employment, the employee was required to attend training sessions to familiarize himself with his employer’s rules, policies, and procedures for truck drivers, including with respect to the employer’s drug and alcohol policy.
The employer’s drug and alcohol policy prohibited the use of illicit drugs and required drivers to undergo random drug and alcohol testing at the employer’s direction. The policy further provided that employees who failed to abide by this policy could be required to undergo training and/or be disciplined up to and including the termination of their employment.
The employee failed random drug tests ordered by his employer on two occasions. In both cases, the drug testing discovered cannabis in his body, which at the time was still an “illicit” drug. For the first infraction, the employer required him to complete training, pass a second drug test, and provided him with a written warning. For the second infraction, the employer met with the employee and inquired whether he had a dependency on cannabis requiring accommodation; upon concluding that he did not, the employer terminated his employment for cause.
No Wrongful Dismissal for Repeated Breaches of the Drug and Alcohol Policy
The employee commenced his action more than a year after the termination of his employment. He claimed, among other things, that he was wrongfully dismissed from his employment, that he was owed aggravated and punitive damages and damages pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act, as well as outstanding but unpaid overtime pay dating back several years.
The Court dismissed the employee’s claim for wrongful dismissal and found that the employer had cause to terminate his employment because of his repeat violations of its drug and alcohol policy. In doing so, the Court affirmed a longstanding test in employment law that termination for a breach of corporate policy requires an employer to prove that the policy is well-known to the employee, that it is consistently enforced, and that the consequences for breach of the policy are proportionate to that breach.
In the circumstances of this case, the Court concluded that the above elements were met.
Regarding the first two elements of this test, the Court found that the employee was acquainted with the drug and alcohol policy at the time his employment was terminated and that the employer consistently enforced the policy. Regarding the second part of the test, the Court noted that the employer informed the employee after his first breach of the policy that any further breach of it could result in the termination of his employment. The Court moreover concluded that drug and alcohol policies like the one at issue here were commonplace in safety-sensitive driving roles like the employee’s, particularly for long-haul drivers operating in the United States where random drug testing policies are mandatory.
With respect to proportionality, the Court held that termination of employment for cause was proportionate to the employee’s breach of the policy. The Court noted that the employer’s drug and alcohol policy was reasonable for employees in safety-sensitive positions. Likewise, the Court determined that there was no evidence before it that the employee was cannabis-dependent nor that the employer needed to accommodate him for such dependence. Accordingly, because the three elements of the test set out above were met, the Court found that the employer had cause to terminate the employee’s employment and that his claim for wrongful dismissal could not stand.
Other Claims Dismissed
The Court also considered and dismissed the employee’s other claims for damages, concluding that they were not made out.
Regarding the employee’s claims for damages under the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Court dismissed this and relied on its determination that the employee was not cannabis-dependent, that the employer did not discriminate against him, and that the employer’s drug and alcohol policy was a reasonable occupational requirement in light of the employee’s role as a long-haul truck driver. The Court similarly rejected the employee’s claim for aggravated and punitive damages, finding respectively that there was no bad faith by the employer in the manner of its dismissal of the employee nor that the employer engaged in egregious or reprehensible conduct.
Lastly, the Court found that no damages for unpaid overtime pay were owing to the employee. While the employee claimed nearly $235,000.00 in unpaid overtime pay, the Court noted that the employee did not act quickly enough in bringing his claim for most of these damages. To the extent that part of the claim for these damages was timely, the Court nonetheless concluded that the employee seriously exaggerated the amount allegedly owed to him and dismissed the remainder of the claim for this reason.
Takeaways
This decision stands out as one of the few recent cases in which a court rejects a wrongful dismissal claim in which the employment relationship was terminated for breaching a drug and alcohol policy. In that respect, the decision affirms that the longstanding test for termination of employment based on violating a company policy continues to apply in Ontario.
For employers, the Court’s reasons in McCarthy v Bison Transport Inc affirm the importance of clearly communicating policies—and the implications of violations of those policies—to employees, particularly if such violations may result in the termination of employment. To that end, employers should consider whether their workforces are being kept up to date on applicable policies and procedures as well as whether additional training to clearly communicate the content and implications of the same is necessary.
Need More Information?
For more information or assistance with wrongful dismissal actions, contact Alex Kennedy at akennedy@filionlaw.com or your regular lawyer at the firm.