Authors: Bethany Hastie and Sofia Cornejo

Abstract

This article examines how courts interpret sexual harassment in the employment law arena through a case analysis of court decisions from Alberta and British Columbia in wrongful dismissal cases involving the alleged perpetrator. Focusing on how courts assess what constitutes serious misconduct to justify summary dismissal, we argue that the conventional legal principles governing wrongful dismissal complaints operate to minimize and normalize certain forms and degrees of sexual misconduct in the workplace, particularly, verbal harassment and isolated instances of physical contact. Our analysis reveals the persistent and lingering influence of gender-based myths and stereotypes in judicial reasoning. However, we also identify decisions where courts adopt a more nuanced understanding of sexual harassment and demonstrate greater sensitivity to the operation of gender-based myths. Such cases offer a foundation for future legal approaches that better align with the evolving understanding of workplace sexual harassment, particularly in the wake of #MeToo.

Resumes

Bethany Hastie is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, Queen’s University. Sofia Cornejo is a PhD candidate at the Peter A. Allard School of Law, University of British Columbia. The authors wish to acknowledge the research assistance of Alie Teachman in the early stages of this project, and funding support from the Farris Fund Award.

Recommended Citation:

Bethany Hastie and Sofia Cornejo, “Serious Enough? Troubling Civil Courts’ Assessments of the Seriousness of Sexual Harassment in Wrongful Dismissal Cases” 15:1 Can J Hum Rts 83, online: <https://cjhr.ca/download/3542/?tmstv=1780513720&v=3543>.