May 20, 2025
The Alberta Court of Justice ruled in Yee v WestJet that WestJet wrongfully dismissed an employee who refused to comply with the company’s COVID-19 vaccination policy on religious grounds.
Facts
The plaintiff employee worked for WestJet for 11 years in various accounting positions. In 2021, she applied for a religious exemption from the company’s mandatory vaccination policy, citing her Christian faith and belief that accepting the vaccine would betray her religious convictions. She supported her request with a letter from her pastor affirming her sincerely held beliefs.
WestJet denied the exemption, arguing that her objections appeared to be based on personal or philosophical grounds rather than religious ones. The employee was placed on an unpaid leave in November 2021 and terminated for cause a month later, despite having worked remotely since May 2021 and maintaining a strong performance record.
Legal Issue
In assessing whether WestJet had just cause for termination, the Court considered whether the termination was proportionate to the employee’s wrongs, taken in the overall context of the employment relationship. While the Court found that the vaccination policy was reasonable and enforceable, and that the employee did not comply with the policy, the employee’s non-compliance did not impact her ability to continue performing her job duties effectively in light of the fact she had been successfully working from home for over six months before her employment was terminated. WestJet could have allowed the employee to continue working from home without any safety concerns.
WestJet argued that the damages payable in light of there not being just cause for termination should be restricted based on the termination clause in the employment contract, and due to an alleged failure to appropriately seek a new position.
Addressing the terms of the contract, the Court referenced its specific language:
You agree that provided WestJet terminates your employment without just cause in accordance with the provision of this paragraph, that you have no additional claim against WestJet for any additional severance or termination compensation.
The Court ruled that, because the employee was not terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the necessary preconditions to trigger that clause were not engaged and WestJet could not rely on it to limit severance.
On the issue of mitigation — and citing the claim and appeal in Plotnikoff v Associated Engineering Alberta Ltd., in which I successfully represented the Plaintiff — the Court found that WestJet failed to lead any evidence establishing what alternative employment opportunities were available to the Plaintiff. Therefore, there was no evidence that could prove the employee would have found new work with different efforts.
The Court’s Decision
The Court ultimately found that an 11-month notice period was applicable, awarding $65,587.72.
This decision underscores the importance of employers carefully evaluating just cause before relying on it, assessing employment contract language to ensure it limits employee claims in all situations, and in bringing forward necessary evidence to meet legal tests.
Author
Dylan Snowdon
Partner
T: 403.705.3632
E: [email protected]
If you have questions about just cause terminations, employment contracts, or managing disputes between employees and employers, please contact any of Carbert Waite LLP’s employment law team.